Our 0.1<1% hollow moon, and near infinite vacuum of Selene L1 / Brad Guth
BradGuth
bit hollow?
Where's our public funded science pertaining to the Earth-moon L1
(Selene L1)?
Since most everything original about our Apollo mission obtained
science is either missing or remains as need-to-know or inaccessible,
where's the other 99.9% of our public funded LRO science?
~ BG
BradGuth
I’ve gotten pretty much nothing but the usual damage-control and
naysay gauntlet of systematic topic/author grief and avoidance about
our potentially hollow moon, anf therefore I’ve revised this topic
introduction from my original rant of “The 1~10% hollow moon” as to
“Our 0.1<1% hollow moon”, and not that it really matters because the
mainstream still isn’t buying into any of it, nor allowing media to
pick up on any notions of such.
Water or even ice exposed at the environment of 3e-21 bar (the nearly
infinite vacuum as found at Selene L1) pretty much instantly
demoleculizes itself into something less than atoms of hydrogen and
oxygen, and that’s pretty much regardless of its volume and original
mass. Therefore, the extremely weak Newtonian force of gravity or if
you like molecular binding force isn’t necessarily worth all that much
when the water or whatever fluid element itself represents a zero
delta-V, and especially upon being lost to that solar wind when
situated within such an extreme vacuum and damn little if any
magnetosphere.
If there’s anything holding a given molecule of fluid or icy h2o
together, it’s those strong electrostatic, diamagnetic plus the usual
atomic and subatomic binding forces and whatever subsequent worth of
good old pressure that doesn’t necessarily involve or require gravity
(although naked pressure simply can’t coexist w/o gravity or vise
versa, whereas artificial pressure or vacuum can only coexist if
there’s a shell or artificial energy field of some kind). According
to the most recent science, apparently not even the extreme surface
cold of –397°F within a polar crater shadow is enough to hold
molecules of ice at 3e-15 bar, as well as suggesting there’s minimal
if any significant residual core heat.
The extremely thick (50<150 km) and robust basalt crust that’s also
rather mineral saturated about our Selene/moon offers an absolutely
terrific shell. Within or especially under that tough shell is where
life as we know it could with some applied technology manage to
survive, as well as manage to contribute to terrestrial matters of
exotic minerals and lots more. At 0.1% hollow (including geode
pockets, cavernous layers or easily excavated volumes to suit),
there’s certainly no shortage of worthy habitat volume, and thereby
whatever task of maintaining of atmospheric pressure simply can’t be
an insurmountable problem.
With near zero gravity as within the offset core of our extremely
unusual moon, and perfectly good odds that the substance outside of
that solid core being of a relatively low density and/or semi-hollow
(poorly compacted) substance or soft mineral matrix that's sandwiched
between that offset core and the otherwise extremely dense, thick and
mineral saturated basalt crust, as such is what drives my continuing
interpretation and subsequent speculation that our Selene/moon is in
fact usability hollow.
Even if this hollow or easily excavated under-crust potential were
limited as to a volume of 0.1%, as such this kind of nicely crust
protected volume would represent a terrific off-world outpost and
otherwise failsafe kind of habitat that’s existing as is. (0.1% of
2.2e19 m3 is 2.2e16 m3, and that’s hardly insignificant, as
representing 3.26e6 m3 for each and every man, woman and child would
make for a pretty nifty interstellar spacecraft, or call it our
lifeboat)
The unusually mineral saturated and otherwise mascon populated basalt
crust itself could also offer existing passages and/or geode like
pockets, as deep enough and volumetric enough to safely utilize as
is. In fact, it might be extremely odd if such voids didn’t exist.
Most of those larger lunar craters are unusually shallow (>1% of their
diameter), as though that original surface prior to impact having a
thick layer of protective ice. Of somewhat newer and much smaller
diameter craters offer bedrock impression or morph depths of <10%,
with only a few exceptions that suggest diameter/depth ratios of <
2:1. However, one of the most recent LRO discovered crater like hole
or possibly an old geothermal vent that’s kind of small and suggesting
as having a much greater depth than its diameter (in other words a
significant vertical hole or cave like entrance formation, and there
should be others).
The 0.1<1% hollow moon / Brad Guth
David Staup
"BradGuth" <brad...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:39472e37-40c8-4af3...@b25g2000prb.googlegroups.com...
Before the Apollo missions we knew almost nothing about the interior of the
Moon. The Apollo missions left seismometers on the lunar surface that have
allowed us to deduce the general features of the Lunar interior by studying
the seismic waves generated by "moonquakes" and occasional meteor impacts
http://csep10.phys.utk.edu/astr161/lect/moon/moon_interior.html
Brad we all know where the hollow area is
BradGuth
> "BradGuth" <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote in message
Then do tell us how and/or why that that extremely massive and
otherwise unusual moon of ours is so crust populated with mascon
issues, and otherwise having such an offset core (especially since the
farside crust is worth <150 km and heavy mineral saturated to boot.
~ BG
BradGuth
Parrot David Staup has offered the usual mainstream status quo of
everything new pertaining to our moon matching with his cloak and
dagger Apollo era science, without one iota of any exception or
implied obfuscation.
Then do tell us, David Staup, as to exactly how and/or why that
extremely massive and otherwise unusual moon of ours (by far the most
substantial via planet:moon ratio) became so unusually thick crust
populated with those pesky mascon issues, and otherwise having such an
offset core mass (especially having to be offset since the farside
crust is worth <150 km and heavy mineral saturated to boot, without
any seismic indications of there being anything the least bit (not
even 0.1%) hollow or fluid worthy to work with.
His purely subjective and otherwise parrot like infomercial script
about our moon simply isn't all that constrictive, nor informative
outside of whatever a kosher approved LeapFrog and/or pop-up
publication of animated and false colorized and/or decolorized
eyecandy and all the usual parrot training has to offer.
btw; in the unavoidable UV fluorescence is where that physically dark
surface of our Selene/moon isn't that of a monochrome light-gray, much
less inert and oddly being selectively retro-reflective at the same
time, though just within those Apollo landing sites. Even raw sodium
gives off an amberish color when UV excited, and many other local
minerals or raw elements should have been offering their color
spectrums of something violet~purple to even somewhat bluish hues
(especially as having been optically unfiltered and unavoidably given
off by many of not via most Apollo items, including those stark white
moonsuits).
~ BG
trigonometry1972@gmail.com |
I suspect less gravity and less mass means more mascon issues.
It is less separated and has had less time to separate in
that the moon is pretty much frozen in place.
But then again what do I know..................Trig
BradGuth
That seems to be the situation for most everyone, as not objectively
knowing the internal matrix of what makes up our moon is common
place. However, common sense and deductive reasoning as based upon
physics and the best available science is going to suggest that the
offset mascon core has created a very low density and/or semi-hollow
nature for that in between material that's just under that extremely
thick and robust basalt crust.
What was needed as of decades ago was a basic threesome of widely
spaced underground or at least bedrock implanted seismology
Instruments reporting data back to us. Instead we've got nothing
that's peer accepted as viable science, as well as most all of the
original Apollo data is MIA, and even 99.9% of our public funded LRO
science isn't being shared.
Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG / “Guth Usenet”
BradGuth
Odd how the regular laws of physics don't seem to work for our moon.
Perhaps that moon really does not involve 2e20 N/sec, because
otherwise that much force would be measurably heating up our planet.
~ BG
BradGuth
Here’s yet another edited food for thought as a subtopic, about our
local binary planetoid Selene/moon that has a little something odd
about its interior that’s also <1% hollow to say about itself;
Gravity Force Inside a Spherical Shell (is always zero)
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/HBASE/Mechanics/sphshell2.html#wtls
First of all, I have never once suggested anything lower mass than
7.35e22 kg (if anything I’ve proposed an extra mass of <262 km worth
of ice for a grand total of 8.5e22 kg), nor have I ever suggested that
our Selene/moon was 90% hollow, nor otherwise have I ever insisted the
interior density below the thick basalt crust being as low as 1 kg/m3
(although the element sodium is a minimal density at .97 g/cm3, not to
mention lithium at .534 g/cm3). So don’t get yourselves all
defensively crazy and huffy about any of this or the hollow stuff,
because it’s just food or thought.
This zero gravity environment of course wouldn't fully apply to our
naked Selene/moon interior unless that were a significant hollow
within a substantial sphere and otherwise at nearly dead center, but
none the less it's still worth our considering the possible
implications of reduced gravity, and it’s especially what-if topic
worthy when the bulk of lunar mass is clearly being held within its
thick and highly paramagnetic basalt crust, with no obvious
indications of having an iron or otherwise dense core. However, once
situated below that thick and robust crust, we can at least expect
that lunar interior gravity to be nearly 10% of Earth, as perhaps 1 m/
s.
Natural/geothermal and isotope generated gas could easily have created
such geode hollows or even pockets of trapped mineral brines and
perhaps a few as having become crystal lined volumes of weird
geological anomalies representing livable voids as deep enough within
the crust as is, as well as for the continual tidal pull of Earth’s
gravity may have significantly offset the original soft/molten
interior core, leaving a substantial hollow/caverness void rising
towards the extremely thick backside crust, as well as for the Earth/
Selene lithobraking encounter should have caused something to shift
within this unusual planetoid we call our moon.
If the thick and paramagnetic basalt plus mineral saturated crust with
many of those heavier lunar elements (including thorium, uranium,
plutonium and of course radium as supposedly derived from the core of
Earth plus via whatever else as having impacted Earth) are situated or
somehow having been coagulated/solidified near the surface, not to
mention a bazillion naked meteor deposits of carbonado/lonsdaleite and
of course always those much heavier metallic elements including
thorium, iron, nickel, platinum and loads of titanium, plus a little
of whatever else was part of Earth. So, for the purely what-if of
this semi-hollow moon topic, how about our considering <10% hollow
moon (2.2 billion cubic kilometers worth)?
How many personally safe interior habitats is 2.2e18 m3 actually
worth?
At 1000 m3 per habitat is offering 2.2e12 units. Given a wide
percentage (more than half) for a perfectly rational (meaning
intelligent) infrastructure is still going to offer 1e12 units of 1e3
m3 each.
However, even if we’re talking of a 1% hollow Selene is still offering
an off-world viable habitat that’s worthy of safely hosting 100
billion units, along with 55% as still going for infrastructure. Seems
more than adequate if such a semi-hollow moon were to be utilized as
an off-world shelter or that of an interstellar survival craft (red
supergiant and helium flashover lifeboat), and of course it gets all
the better yet if it should became heavily iced over along the way.
Along with my LSE-CM/ISS (Lunar Space Elevator and Counter Mass with
the terrific amount of ISS habitat interior) is what makes the to/from
aspects of utilizing our semi-hollow Selene/moon rather simple and
energy efficient, though most likely as owned and operated by China
and India (so expect to pay a hefty toll).
> Father Haskell:
> How will you feed all 100 billion of those units?
Chinese and India takeout from their LSE-CM/ISS (Selene L1) outpost/
gateway, and otherwise direct fly-by-rocket shipments of fish and rice
via North Korea, and perhaps fresh fruit from Cuba (via Guantanamo
Space Port) should keep this off-world outpost and the moon interior
as full of happy campers.
As I'd said, given roughly 55% as the lunar community infrastructure
should provide enough volume as industrial greenhouse and
accommodating whatever assortments of chickens, turkeys and pigs. As
you know, Earth isn't ever going to be very far away, not even if we
relocate Selene out to Earth L1 is still relatively nearby, and even I
can think of all kinds of ways for a continuous supply of just about
anything, in exchange for He3 and any number of other precious
elements that would be mostly robotic mined, processed and efficiently
exported to Earth, or simply effectively stored for future needs.
Obviously we'd need to accommodate at most fewer than 10 billion such
habitat units as within our lunar interior, thereby leaving 95%
available as infrastructure for working within this 1% hollow moon.
Remember, if most everyone is living inside the moon, Eden/Earth
stands a darn good chance of once again becoming a thriving plant and
animal sanctuary that's nearly devoid of humans and their industrial
scale polluting. (perhaps at most 1% stays with Earth in order to
repair/salvage the frail environment and help feed the other 99% of
folks living within the moon, and the subsequent visiting of Earth by
these others would become a highly restricted privilege).
However, if our continuing recession turns into WWIII, that gets all-
out and downright nuclear dirty, plus otherwise chemical and
biologically lethal, there may be few if any safe places on Earth
worth risking further genetic mutations to your frail DNA.
Trust me, I have a reasonably failsafe plan. It's rather complex and
certainly not perfect, but at least it's offering a whole lot better
constructive option than most any other plan of salvaging humanity
that’s designed mostly to benefit only the rich and powerful surviving
off-world, while the rest of us village idiots get to tough it out and
otherwise end up paying for everything that primarily benefits these
rich and powerful individuals (including fighting their wars).
Btw; If a black hole were merely that of an event horizon shell of
whatever horrific mass and given density (say a thick swarm of tightly
packed photons and electrons orbiting this hollow void or perhaps
sustaining a small core of positron antimatter) as surrounded by
whatever else makes you a happy camper. Once again, a little reminder
as physics food for thought: The gravity force inside a physical
shell or energy sphere is always zero, that is unless it has some
kind of an extremely massive core that’s magnetically, diamagnetic/
paramagnetic centered or somehow electrostatic isolated within this
otherwise semi-hollow sphere.
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/HBASE/Mechanics/sphshell2.html#wtls
BradGuth
Don't tell me, 3e-21 bar isn't enough vacuum to go along with the zero
delta-V of Selene L1.
~ BG
~ BG
BradGuth
Where's the objective evidence that our Selene/moon wasn't ever
covered by any thick icy layer?
What's not possible for such an interstellar craft of <8.5e22 kg?
If the south polar grater wasn't caused by having encountered Earth,
than what happen to that extremely large item which caused such a
terrific crater?
http://imraneee.blogspot.com/search/label/Moon
~ BG
BradGuth
Where's the objective evidence that our Selene/moon wasn't ever
covered by any thick icy layer?
What's not possible for using Selene as such an interstellar craft of
<8.5e22 kg?
If that south polar grater wasn't caused by having encountered Earth,
than what happen to that extremely large item which caused such a
terrific crater?
http://imraneee.blogspot.com/search/label/Moon
On Nov 13, 5:27 am, herbertglaz...@webtv.net (G=EMC^2 Glazier) wrote:
> BG Gravity sees to it that objects do not have a hollow core. All
> evidence shows this to b reality Bert
In other words, a balloon is actually not even 0.1% hollow?
How about water balloons? How about an Emu egg or the tough soccer
ball that's instead filled with a mineral brine, beer or pretty much
anything fluid or muck instead of air?
0.1% really isn't very hollow, whereas displacements via liquids,
muds, various oily hydrocarbons and of course other gasses (including
hydrogen, helium and methane, or whatever mineral brines (alkaline or
acidic) are every bit as good of hollow worthy as geode trapped air.
How solid is porous rock, such as volcanic pumice and especially that
which floats? (not very if it’s 70% hollow)
How solid is diatomaceous earth(DE)? (not very, unless 95% hollow
doesn’t count)
What exactly do you consider hollow, other than empty beer cans or
that spare empty keg you either sit on or use as a portable urinal
because your $50/month water has been shut off.
Perhaps you really need to be more open minded, or simply more hollow-
head (brainless) thinking about this one. You might also care to go
caving now and then, or at least for God's sake read a few of those
old National Geographic issues about such underground matters. In
other words, what the hell is the matter with you?
btw, what happened inside of our Selene/moon when its supposedly iron
core got pulled or offset towards Earth? (how about, it leaves a void)
You do realize that the heavy mineral saturated farside crust is
nearly twice as thick (<107 km and perhaps even somewhat thicker polar
areas), as compared to the nearside crust (<60 km), which only means
the lunar core had to have been pulled/shifted even further towards
Earth.
At near zero bar, or roughly –15 psi isn’t an insignificant force to
ignore, of such vacuum easily holding up a cavernous domed roof made
of basalt and various minerals that are only slightly (<1.6 m/s)
compressed or loaded down by gravity.
Assuming voids of trapped gasses other than common air inside; How
much inward pressure can a thick basalt sphere of tough bedrock deal
with, without its imploding (especially since there's an outside
vacuum of 3e-15 bar and only 1.62 m/s of gravity)?
With that much outside vacuum and the reduced gravity to work with
(especially deep underneath that thick crust), imagine how extremely
simple and even failsafe it’ll be to excavate or simply vacate
whatever’s (mud, liquid or gas) inside a given geode pocket or porous/
cavernous layer. That moon of ours could just as easily be 1% hollow
as is, with the potential of becoming artificially hollowed out to
10%.
~ BG
BradGuth
Yes in deed, good old basalt bedrock has 50<750 ppm of h2o. So what?
Seems our NASA LCROSS team is on serious steroids and/or hard drugs,
as in cover thy butt with all the media hype, spin and eyecandy meds
they can muster, or else. It’s called job security, except theirs is
with loads of nifty benefits and perks like COL insurance.
They must think our president/BHO and his staff of well educated
advisers are easily snookered and dumbfounded past the point of no
return. Because guess what folks, there’s always water to behold from
creating any crater on most any planet or moon, mostly because basalt
always has at the very least 50 ppm to begin with (<750 ppm).
Secondly, keeping yourself warm is really not a problem, as is with
keeping yourself and whatever technology cool. For those polar crater
locations, Stirling energy conversions from that full spectrum of
solar photons converted into electrons is really going to become nifty
when there’s such a terrific thermal (light to dark) differential to
begin with.
Once any molecules of water/ice are freed at 3e-15 bar, it becomes
nearly explosive in how it would unavoidably react by expanding into
such an extreme vacuum, and there’s all sorts of secondary IR that
even manages to get into the deepest of those polar craters from time
to time, contributing sufficient thermal energy to boil off or rather
sublime most any raw/naked volume of ice at that extensive vacuum, not
to mention the moon itself is also radiating <22 mw/m2 of it’s
residual and/or thorium/uranium core heat (thicker polar crust has got
to be worth at least 10 mw/m2).
The 50<750 some odd PPM of water that’s sealed in lunar surface
bedrock and deeper crust basalt is one thing that’s likely sure enough
there to behold. However, raw/naked ice under a crystal dry layer of
physically dark carbon dust is not as likely to exist/coexist unless
that moon either isn’t very old, and/or there’s water or mineral brine
that’s still leaking/extruding out from a substantial geode reservoir
or layer protected aquifers inside the moon that’s otherwise being
sucked crystal dry by all of that 3e-15 bar vacuum.
AP / “The lunar crash kicked up at least 25 gallons and that's only
what scientists could see from the plumes of the impact, Colaprete
said.”
And yet there’s still no UV florescence imaging or public review of
those original gamma spectrum readings. So, it remains pretty much
insider and/or need-to-know business as per usual, whereas raw/naked
ice in the extreme vacuum of space apparently doesn’t have to go by
any pesky laws of physics, or any need of independent peer review.
The LCROSS 20 meter crater is basically giving up 1e3 m3 worth of
displaced and/or partially vaporized basalt that’s mineral saturated
and supposedly containing <250 PPM water. That’s roughly <3.5e3 tonnes
worth of lunar basalt w/minerals and those ppm of water to start off
with, and by taking roughly 11% of that as having been vaporized is
perhaps what our NASA has claimed as having given off measurable
water, that such frozen basalt by eights should have. I think the
impact vaporized closer to 25% if not as great as 33%, which means the
h2o content of that basalt wasn’t as great as 100 PPM, but then who’s
really counting since ordinary physics and easily peered replicated
science does not matter.
I would tend to favor that our physically dark lunar surface is about
as crystal dry anf electrostatic charged as things within such a
terrific vacuum environment could ever get, though I’ll give a very
remote possibility of there being an underground artisan cache of
water or mineral brine that has been gradually venting/leaking out and
into just those continually frozen craters is at least technically
possible, although it's extremely unlikely those unavoidable h2o
vapors weren't easily detected by astronomers and their various
sensitive spectrometry methods as of at least decades ago.
Here's yet another image of the sorts of crystal dry minerals that our
moon has to offer. These hue saturations are not bogus/false colors,
just the original mineral colors as having been enhanced on behalf of
honest observationology, similar to the nifty eyecandy that Hubble
gets published and accepted all the time.
Moon in color (natural but obviously saturation levels cranked up)
http://deepskycolors.com/pics/astro/2008/10/10-12-2008_MoonColor.jpg
From LRO UV fluorescence imaging, this amount of mineral hue
saturation as secondary reflectance should be at least ten fold better
yet, as well as a good thousand fold better resolution when obtained
from just 50 km. With their LRO extended dynamic range, any sign of
water vapor (atoms of h2o) as coming off such a naked surface of any
deep crater shadowed ice would have been unavoidably unmistakable. Of
course this means there really is not such raw/naked ice to behold,
but instead only vaporized basalt water.
So, apparently our NASA gets to lie their public funded butts off, and
the rest of us don't, because at roughly 100<250 ppm of what's
supposedly accessible h2o within moon basalt, as such would have only
required vaporizing a few hundred tonnes of basalt in order to provide
those 25 gallons (94+ kg) of water. In other words, at 250 ppm it
would only require vaporizing 400 tonnes out of the 3.5e3 tonnes of
basalt in order to release 100 kg of its water, along with releasing
at the very least 1000 kg of sodium (though many areas of the lunar
surface are rich or saturated in sodium to the tune of <50,000 ppm),
plus there's many kg worth of other minerals and of course there's
30,000<100,000 ppm O2 = 12<40t that shouldn't have been all that
unexpected or hard to detect.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basalt
Basalt generally has a composition of 45–55 wt% SiO2, 2–6 wt% total
alkalis, 0.5–2.0 wt% TiO2, 5–14 wt% FeO and 14 wt% or more Al2O3.
Contents of CaO are commonly near 10 wt%, those of MgO commonly
in the range 5 to 12 wt%.
High alumina basalts have aluminium contents of 17–19 wt% Al2O3;
boninites have magnesium contents of up to 15% MgO. Rare
feldspathoid-
rich mafic rocks, akin to alkali basalts, may have Na2O + K2O
contents
of 12% or more.
http://www.agu.org/pubs/crossref/1995/95JE00503.shtml
"Calculation of oxygen yield (as released by hydrogen gas reduction
of ilmenite) show that (1) beneficiated basalt will provide the most
oxygen (8–10%)"
Of course there’s lots of good old hydrogen released, and then helium
3 (3He at 10 ppb) that need not be wasted. In other words, for every
billion tonnes of vaporized basalt and surface deposits we get ten
tonnes and < $25B worth of 3He.
“The energy content of 3He is: E(3He)= 2e8 kWh/kg-1 ... If Fusion is
the process of obtaining energy by adding things together” could be
interpreted as worth <$2.5M/kg, especially as fossil duels are made
spendy or illegal to use unless their exhaust emissions are fully
certified as green, and average consumer cost of energy hits $0.25/
kwhr
A serious solar farm of mylar mirrors could vaporize lunar basalt
rather nicely, especially in that 3e-15 bar vacuum.
At perhaps as little as one kg per 100 m2 of mylar mirror shouldn't be
so unlikely. A full tonne of such deployed mirrors is thus offering
1e5 m2 of reflected and focused solar energy into a bedrock area of
perhaps 4 m2.
At only 90% efficiency is offering 3.4e6 w/m2, which at 3e-15 bar
should vaporize a hell of a lot of something. That collective 1e5 m2
of mylar mirror efficiency as focused down to 4 m2 should actually
become worth 3.6e6 w/m2. Even if each mirror assembly was worth 100
kg is a seriously dirt cheap alternative for utilizing solar energy,
whereas robotics accomplish most of that exposed physical and
technical process.
BradGuth
> BG Gravity sees to it that objects do not have a hollow core. All
> evidence shows this to b reality Bert
You and your solid only planets and moons, as another one of a bipolar
kind of mindset that wants to believe every last Apollo mission word,
as though it was derived from God. So far, how is that ruse working
out?
BradGuth
This 0.1% hollow moon conjecture is just plain old physics, geology
and deductive logic that’s based upon the best available science, that
seems entirely doable to those of us with an open mindset and a
willingness to pursue viable alternatives to doing absolutely nothing.
This other humongous geoengineering via moon relocation project
funding, at most representing an investment demand of $1000 from each
and every person on Earth is worth $6.75 trillion, prorated as per a
given century is just a whopping $10/year (less than $1/month).
If less than $1/month is still too much of your hard earned loot to
ask for, in order to manage the entire long-term salvation of Earth,
and a whole lot more technological advancements as value returned
because of having multiple tethered elevators as well as offering at
least two zero delta-V outpost/gateways and those easily managed
science platforms as well as contributing loads of nifty astronomy
plus off-world habitats associated within these robust tethered
stations, plus those spacious units upon/within our Selene/moon that's
interactively parked within Earth L1, then who am I to suggest
otherwise.
I’m pretty certain that I could drop any number of impressive names
that would have to agree with me, but then if your mindset is naysay
or that of an obfuscation done deal, as in the words of GW Bush “so
what’s the difference” (whereas obviously the ends justify the means),
then I’ve got nothing that’ll make any difference.
BradGuth
Just because our moon should be at least 0.1% hollow doesn't mean that
others can subjectively insist that it's 100% solid through and
through, and otherwise get away with their systematic topic/author
stalking and bashing without consequences.
Perhaps it’s a good thing that we still do not have any science
platform of instruments or much less any space-habitat and physics lab
situated within the Earth-moon L1 (Selene L1), because we’d just know
a whole lot more about Earth as well as our unusual moon, and
otherwise having the best possible zero delta-V location that’s always
on plain sight and so nearby, of course always representing zero
gravity (other than its own internal mass) and offering that near
absolute vacuum of 3e-21 bar. Otherwise the LSE-CM/ISS as space
elevator to/from our physically dark and nasty old moon as well as
providing the zero delta-V outpost/gateway/(Clarke Station) of Selene
L1 couldn’t be utilized for much of anything except making us a cool
trillion in profit per year.
As far as this 0.1% hollow moon conjecture is just plain old geology
and physics, of deductive logic that’s based upon the best available
science which seems entirely doable to those of us with an open
mindset and a willingness to pursue viable alternatives to otherwise
doing absolutely nothing.
This other humongous geoengineering via moon relocation project
funding, at most representing an investment demand of $1000 from each
and every person on Earth is worth $6.75 trillion, prorated as per a
given century is just a whopping $10/year (less than $1/month).
If less than $1/month is still too much of your hard earned loot to
ask for, in order to manage the entire long-term salvation of Earth,
and a whole lot more technological advancements as value returned
because of having multiple tethered elevators as well as offering at
least two zero delta-V outpost/gateways and those easily managed
science platforms as well as contributing loads of nifty astronomy
plus spacious off-world habitats associated within these robust
tethered stations, plus those extra spacious units upon/within our
Selene/moon that's interactively parked within Earth L1, then who am I
to suggest otherwise.
I’m pretty certain that I could drop any number of impressive names
and investigative research groups that would have to agree with me,
but then if your ulterior motivated mindset as naysay or that of an
obfuscation done deal that’s forever locked into denial, such as in
the words of GW Bush “so what’s the difference” (whereas obviously the
ends justify the means), then I’ve got nothing for you and others of
your kind that’ll make any difference.
BradGuth
Makes you wonder when so little is known about our own moon, as well
as unknowns about the Earth-moon L1 (Selene L1), that perhaps our
DARPA and NASA haven't been as honest and forthcoming as we'd once
thought.
We actually know considerably more about Mars than our moon, and LRO
isn't thus far sharing more than 0.1% of its science. Our NASA even
has old lunar mission technology without the technical documentation
or the objective evidence of how such was ever accomplished (not even
Kodak can explain the weird out-of-this-world performance of their
unfiltered film).
~ BG
BradGuth
Sort of makes you wonder when so little is known about our own moon,
as well as unknowns about the Earth-moon L1 (Selene L1), that perhaps
our DARPA and NASA haven't been as honest and forthcoming as we'd once
thought.
We actually know considerably more about Mars than our moon, and our
spendy LRO mission isn't thus far sharing more than 0.1% of its
science. Our NASA even
has old lunar mission technology without the technical documentation
or the objective evidence of how such was ever accomplished (not even
Kodak can explain the weird out-of-this-world performance of their
unfiltered film).
No wonder our NASA isn't sharing those UV fluorescence colored images
of that mineral saturated moon, that's otherwise so physically dark
and unavoidably reactive.
btw; isn't the 1.2 kw/m2 as surface reflected IR kind of hot?
~ BG
BradGuth
> On Nov 27, 11:13 am, BradGuth <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Nov 6, 10:56 pm, BradGuth <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > Where’s the objective evidence that our Selene/moon is not the least
> > > bit hollow?
>
> > > Where's our public funded science pertaining to the Earth-moon L1
> > > (Selene L1)?
>
> > > Since most everything original about our Apollo mission obtained
> > > science is either missing or remains as need-to-know or inaccessible,
> > > where's the other 99.9% of our public funded LRO science?
>
Second btw; how can our moon(Selene) be the only orb in the solar
system without at least 0.1% worth of potential voids inside?
~ BG
BradGuth
Notice how unusually quiet our spendy LRO mission has been.
Too much good information other than their monochrome imaging?
~ BG
~ BG
BradGuth
Once again, it's need-to-know and otherwise a highly selective release
of LRO science that shares as little new data as possible about our
physically dark and otherwise mineral saturated moon(Selene). Even
its minimal density atmosphere of sodium is taboo/nondisclosure rated,
as well as whatever gamma, X-ray and UV spectrometry has to offer, not
to mention SAR imaging. (perhaps there's simply too much local
radiation interference plus secondary/recoil of mineral fluorescence
to deal with)
~ BG
BradGuth
Folks here what everyone to believe our moon is solid as a rock. Of
course these are the very exact same folks that insisted Muslims had
WMD coming out their ears, and that we did nothing the least bit wrong
by hiring OBL and then by lying to him and his men that accomplished
our cold-war dirty work.
~ BG
BradGuth
Interesting how officially taboo/nondisclosure as well as unusually
passive and otherwise inert our Apollo moon has become. Even its L1
is off-limits as to discussing any of many possibilities for future
usage, such as for my lunar space elevator (LSE-CM/ISS).
Why would our supposed "right stuff" of Apollo and most everything
since have to obfuscate/exclude anything?
Publicly funded = top secret and otherwise forever lost. How much
NASA and DARPA corruption is too much?
Where's the other 99.9% of our LRO mission science data?
~ BG
Eric Chomko
Sympathetic to radical muslims now? Why don't you move to Pakistan or
Iran and tell us about it all them, okay?
Eric Chomko
You stole the idea from Kim Stanley Robinson, author of the Red Mars,
Green Mars, Blue Mars trilogy.
>
> Why would our supposed "right stuff" of Apollo and most everything
> since have to obfuscate/exclude anything?
Because you don't understand it. Not a sending problem, more a
receiving problem. ;)
>
> Publicly funded = top secret and otherwise forever lost. How much
> NASA and DARPA corruption is too much?
Why don't you define that?
>
> Where's the other 99.9% of our LRO mission science data?
>
Forthcoming. Didn't you like the idea of finding water near the south
pole of the moon?
BradGuth
Your very large carbon footprint is noted, as is your policy of
obfuscation and denial.
Apparently saving Earth and humanity from itself simply isn’t good
enough for those of you that would never revise history in order to
reflect the best available truths, or otherwise change a damn thing
for the better or greater good.
It has become clear as to what one needs to do in order to win a
Nobel, is not to resolve our needs for cleaner, safer and more
affordable energy, nor to moderate our vast industrial and civilian
forms of pollution, nor getting any grip on our own frail biology and
the vast biodiversity that makes us and our planet so complex and
unique, or even that of accomplishing any future migrations to off-
world places. Instead is to expand another war as based upon bogus or
irrational logic in order to cloak the true reasons, as well as
investing trillions of our hard earned public loot because of a few
tribal feuds by folks that are by our standards mostly extremely poor
and of deeply religious types without hardly any carbon footprint,
that are simply tired of their having been continually pissed upon and
taken advantage of by those of us with extremely large carbon
footprints that clearly do not believe in hell or any kind of
benevolence, short of our providing a perpetual police state that'll
never become a self-sustaining independent nation because of tribal
religions and traditions that simply insist upon disagreeing with one
another, rather than joining forces in order to fight the much larger
outside carbon footprint forces that are continually taking advantage
of the situation.
~ BG
BradGuth
> Where’s the objective evidence that our Selene/moon is not the least
> bit hollow?
>
> Where's our public funded science pertaining to the Earth-moon L1
> (Selene L1)?
>
> Since most everything original about our Apollo mission obtained
> science is either missing or remains as need-to-know or inaccessible,
> where's the other 99.9% of our public funded LRO science?
>
> ~ BG
Darla, what's the average voltage differential between Earth and our
moon?
Secondly, what's the maximum +/- voltage differential?
How many Joules worth of energy/force can that moon(Selene) represent?
~ BG
Darla
What kind of cake are you baking?
And why ask me for ingredients that are readily available?
Don't hollow cakes "fall"?
--
**** Darla
Be well and come... be welcome
You are the fifth star!
BradGuth
> "BradGuth" <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote in message
Your purely terrestrial obfuscation and denials are noted. As per
usual, you manage to deliver nothing of any constructive value to this
or most any other topic, unless the usual Darla jibber jabber is now
the new physics and science policy of those Rothschild seans.
Tell us something we don't know about ice in space, such as within a
terrific vacuum and 1 AU of our sun, and otherwise as interstellar
accumulated ice.
btw, most cakes are more like 10+% hollow, and a really good cake is
at the vary least 50% hollow. So, how's our 0.1% hollow moon doing
these days?
Perhaps seans and yourself don't know how to bake.
~ BG
Eric Chomko
And your very large cloud of methane, both oral and anal, is noted, as
is your continued confusion about the world.
>
> Apparently saving Earth and humanity from itself simply isn’t good
> enough for those of you that would never revise history in order to
> reflect the best available truths, or otherwise change a damn thing
> for the better or greater good.
And you're not part of that humanity?
>
> It has become clear as to what one needs to do in order to win a
> Nobel, is not to resolve our needs for cleaner, safer and more
> affordable energy, nor to moderate our vast industrial and civilian
> forms of pollution, nor getting any grip on our own frail biology and
> the vast biodiversity that makes us and our planet so complex and
> unique, or even that of accomplishing any future migrations to off-
> world places. Instead is to expand another war as based upon bogus or
> irrational logic in order to cloak the true reasons, as well as
> investing trillions of our hard earned public loot because of a few
> tribal feuds by folks that are by our standards mostly extremely poor
> and of deeply religious types without hardly any carbon footprint,
> that are simply tired of their having been continually pissed upon and
> taken advantage of by those of us with extremely large carbon
> footprints that clearly do not believe in hell or any kind of
> benevolence, short of our providing a perpetual police state that'll
> never become a self-sustaining independent nation because of tribal
> religions and traditions that simply insist upon disagreeing with one
> another, rather than joining forces in order to fight the much larger
> outside carbon footprint forces that are continually taking advantage
> of the situation.
>
I recycle and continue to do more than my share of caring for the
environment.
And you? When was the last time you planted a tree?
Eric
Eric Chomko
> "BradGuth" <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote in message
I believe his hollow head is more at question here.
BradGuth
You telling a hollow Rothschild that others are hollow is real funny.
So, what's our semi-hollow moon worth in terms of voltage and joules?
~ BG
Eric Chomko
I thought you were a Mennonite? Now you're a Rothschild? What next, a
Vanderbuilt?
>
> So, what's our semi-hollow moon worth in terms of voltage and joules?
>
First explain to me why you want to measure the moon it terms of
voltages and joules?
BradGuth
Your typically skewed out-of-context interpretation is noted.
>
> > So, what's our semi-hollow moon worth in terms of voltage and joules?
>
> First explain to me why you want to measure the moon it terms of
> voltages and joules?
Because we need to know this before establishing my LSE-CM/ISS and its
tether dipole element that'll reach to within 2r of Earth (6371 km
from the surface of Earth, give or take a few hundred km). Secondly,
it's a darn good source of renewable clean energy that we may need to
tap or otherwise put to good use (such as running space elevators or
laser beaming of energy).
~ BG
BradGuth
Darla remains without a clue about out moon(Selene). Gee whiz, what a
surprise.
How about all that molecular remainders within the Selene L1, as our
local version of extremely hot H2 and He dark matter at 3e-21 bar.
A cold interstellar dark molecular cloud with no nearby gravity in
sight (so to speak) might host <1e12 of mostly H2 and He per m3 (as
cold and insufficient mass to form into anything without benefit of a
substantial gravity seed).
~ BG
Nightcrawler
> I recycle and continue to do more than my share of caring for the
> environment.
> And you? When was the last time you planted a tree?
>
And no, Guthie, scrubbing the knot hole of the oak tree in the
backyard is not planting a tree.
Nightcrawler
> Darla remains without a clue about out moon(Selene). Gee whiz, what a
> surprise.
Your Swiss cheese version is clued in?
BradGuth
No, she/he just doesn't know how to bake a cake. Apparently
everything they eat (including cake and bread) is 100% solid,
supposedly like our Apollo moon.
~ BG
Nightcrawler
> No, she/he just doesn't know how to bake a cake. Apparently
> everything they eat (including cake and bread) is 100% solid,
> supposedly like our Apollo moon.
>
> ~ BG
How about a cream cheese pie, with cherry topping and graham cracker
crust?
BradGuth
Only if it's solid as a rock, because our moon(Selene) is supposedly
solid as a rock. (just kidding)
~ BG
Lomriy
Of course we know how to bake!
And you're not talking about a "spongy" hollow planet, are you?
We obviously know better than you that a really good cake is much more than
just 50% "air", but that is different from "hollow".
"Hollow" indicates like a big, huge cave.
The Moon would crush itself into a smaller sphere if it were hollow.
Don't you know anything?
--
**** Lomie
Lomriy
"Nightcrawler" <Dirty...@dirtcheap.net> wrote in message
news:mtWdnWEEzrjxSbfW...@giganews.com...
NOW you're talking!
Make mine blueberry topping, kay?
Lomriy
Even "solid" rock is mostly air, silly.
Don't you know ANYTHING ?
BradGuth
> "BradGuth" <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote in message
No, in some instances our solids and fluids are mostly hydrogen (like
the rest of this universe).
Don't you 'seans' know ANYTHING ?
Tell us something/anything we don't already know about our moon.
What's with the lack of so much other science from our LRO mission?
Are all Rothschilds as Republican as yourself?
What part of your faith is different from that of our terrestrial
Zionism?
~ BG
Lomriy
Faith?
They won't let me go there.
All I can say is that we have faith enough in ourselves.
Oh yeah, and that the Moon is not lifeless.
The rest is pea soup of your own microwaving.
BradGuth
Why of course not. Your satanic rituals are therefore safe for the
moment.
>
> All I can say is that we have faith enough in ourselves.
Pretend Atheism gives the most options. Too bad your actions have
been exactly the same as those of ZNRs.
>
> Oh yeah, and that the Moon is not lifeless.
I believe that's correct, whereas under a few (10+) meters of that
mineral saturated basalt is a better protected environment for complex
DNA than our terrestrial environment has to offer.
>
> The rest is pea soup of your own microwaving.
>
> --
> **** Lomie
> Be well and come... be welcome
> You are the fifth star!
Your soup analogy of microwaved pea is noted.
~ BG
BradGuth
> "Nightcrawler" <Dirtyde...@dirtcheap.net> wrote in message
Our LORC has at least ten fold better dynamic range(DR) than any
unfiltered Kofak film, and yet the lunar surface as having one spot-
source of illumination is so physically dark, such that not even this
extremely nifty imaging advantage of vastly superior DR is sufficient
to record whatever is within the shadows upon that crystal dry and
thus electrostatic charged and extremely dusty surface, that's
otherwise on average as dark as coal.
So, in addition to such terrific monochrome images that are not
offering us 10% as good of DR as the Apollo Kodak film era (when it
should be the other way around, especially if taking earthshine into
account), where's the mineral fluorescence imaging of all those
secondary/recoil colors?
Besides the UV fluorescence imaging that's still nowhere to be found,
how about the LRO IR imaging and their thermal gradients to go along
with those?
~ BG
BradGuth
> On Dec 16, 10:48 pm, BradGuth <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> > On Nov 6, 10:56 pm, BradGuth <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > Where’s the objective evidence that our Selene/moon is not the least
> > > bit hollow?
>
> > > Where's our public funded science pertaining to the Earth-moon L1
> > > (Selene L1)?
>
> > > Since most everything original about our Apollo mission obtained
> > > science is either missing or remains as need-to-know or inaccessible,
> > > where's the other 99.9% of our public funded LRO science?
>
>
> > moon?
>
> > Secondly, what's the maximum +/- voltage differential?
>
> > How many Joules worth of energy/force can that moon(Selene) represent?
>
>
>
> surprise.
>
> How about all that molecular remainders within the Selene L1, as our
> local version of extremely hot H2 and He dark matter at 3e-21 bar.
>
> A cold interstellar dark molecular cloud with no nearby gravity in
> sight (so to speak) might host <1e12 of mostly H2 and He per m3 (as
> cold and insufficient mass to form into anything without benefit of a
> substantial gravity seed).
This following context means the tidal offset core of our moon/Selene
is more dead and even colder than the core of Mars.
http://spaceflightnow.com/news/n0912/20lroresults/
"The moon has one of the most extreme thermal environments of any
body in the solar system," said David Paige, principal investigator
for the Diviner payload at the University of California, Los Angeles.
In October, Diviner detected a cold trap in Hermite crater with
temperatures of nearly -415 degrees Fahrenheit.
"To put that kind of temperature into perspective, nothing like this
has ever yet been measured in the solar system," Paige said. "One
would have to maybe travel far beyond the Kuiper Belt to find an
object with a temperature this low."
~ BG
BradGuth
And why did I bother to say the exact same thing as of nearly a decade
ago, that our naked, crystal dry and highly electrostatic charged
lunar surface of such unusual mineral deposits, along with its
unavoidable secondary/recoil radiation that’s coming at you from all
directions, was anything but DNA friendly.
http://spaceflightnow.com/news/n0912/20lroresults/
As sun activity increases, the impact of solar energetic particles
will increase relative to galactic cosmic rays.
"We are in a period during this historic solar minimum where the
radiation rates are elevated but are at tolerable levels in terms of
radiation risk," Spence said.
But the CRaTER instrument also discovered unexpected levels of
radiation closer to the lunar surface, where the moon should block
cosmic rays.
Many scientists believed the moon's mass would shield astronauts
working on the surface, but LRO's discovery shows something on the
moon is producing a secondary source of radiation.
"The net affect could be that you don't get much help from the moon at
all," Spence said. "In fact, some of the secondary particles might be
even more hazardous in terms of their radiation dose."
LRO takes measurements from an altitude of about 31 miles, so
researchers are not sure what dosages astronauts will see at the
surface. Spence said surface radiation levels from the secondary lunar
source may be as high as the dose from galactic cosmic rays.
A leading hypothesis for the lunar radiation source is the interaction
between cosmic rays and soil. As energetic particles strike regolith,
the collisions could liberate other particles and hurl them high above
the moon.
Spence said the revelations would not prohibit human exploration of
the moon, but researchers are eager to learn more about the surprising
radiation fluxes.
As solar activity increases, LRO will gather information on radiation
dangers posed by particles in the solar wind. LRO data, combined with
results from a fleet of space weather monitors and solar
observatories, will hopefully lead to more accurate forecasts of solar
events emitting high radiation, according to Wargo.
Such predictions are the "holy grail" for lunar scientists, Wargo
said.
"There are often precursors to the solar proton events, so you have
some hope if you're outside a habitation or out of shielding to get
back to some safer place where there's significant shielding," Spence
said. "I think at the moon there are ways to mitigate and deal with
both types of radiation risk."
-
This following context means the tidal offset core of our moon/Selene
is more inert dead and even colder than the subdued core of Mars.
http://spaceflightnow.com/news/n0912/20lroresults/
"The moon has one of the most extreme thermal environments of any
body in the solar system," said David Paige, principal investigator
for the Diviner payload at the University of California, Los Angeles.
In October, Diviner detected a cold trap in Hermite crater with
temperatures of nearly -415 degrees Fahrenheit.
"To put that kind of temperature into perspective, nothing like this
has ever yet been measured in the solar system," Paige said. "One
would have to maybe travel far beyond the Kuiper Belt to find an
object with a temperature this low."
-
I find it interesting that so many of our best scientists are suddenly
at shock and awe or amazement as to what levels of radiation risk our
moon has to offer anyone standing upon its naked surface, especially
as surrounded by all that unusually dense assortment of raw elements
that’ll unavoidably turn cosmic energy into everything from soft X-
rays to gamma., plus whatever our sun contributes directly and
otherwise causing everything from the secondary/recoil IR of 1200 w/m2
to that of hard X-rays that can easily become lethal saturation within
as little as hours worth of exposure. Oddly, not one frame of any
Kodak film from our Apollo era showed us any hint of such radiation
dosage, as though it wasn’t even measurable.
I guess my suggestions of digging in so as to have a few meters worth
of basalt between your frail DNA and all of that surrounding radiation
exposure was just foolishness on my part. However, in many places the
crust/bedrock or composite soil of our physically dark moon is likely
several times more radioactive than Earth, so as not being exactly
failsafe even if you’re entirely situated deep underground.
Essentially, it’s as though that moon is not made of Earth, because
some locations offering thorium, uranium and radium deposits upon or
within that moon will simply have to be avoided regardless of being
dug in.
So, just because the moon is potentially 0.1% hollow doesn’t insure
that your frail DNA is going to be entirely safe in all such hollow
locations. Harmful mineral deposits of whatever’s radioactive should
have been easily mapped as of 4+ decades ago, because the sufficient
technology for such existed, at least to within a km2 resolution, and
as of most recently a surface resolution of 10 x 10 or 100 m2 should
have this surface background dosage nailed as to what sorts of heavy
minerals and radioactive substances exist.
BradGuth
And why did I bother to say the exact same thing as of nearly a decade
BradGuth
Are you suggesting that I should become as thoughtless as yourself?
>
>
> > It has become clear as to what one needs to do in order to win a
> > Nobel, is not to resolve our needs for cleaner, safer and more
> > affordable energy, nor to moderate our vast industrial and civilian
> > forms of pollution, nor getting any grip on our own frail biology and
> > the vast biodiversity that makes us and our planet so complex and
> > unique, or even that of accomplishing any future migrations to off-
> > world places. Instead is to expand another war as based upon bogus or
> > irrational logic in order to cloak the true reasons, as well as
> > investing trillions of our hard earned public loot because of a few
> > tribal feuds by folks that are by our standards mostly extremely poor
> > and of deeply religious types without hardly any carbon footprint,
> > that are simply tired of their having been continually pissed upon and
> > taken advantage of by those of us with extremely large carbon
> > footprints that clearly do not believe in hell or any kind of
> > benevolence, short of our providing a perpetual police state that'll
> > never become a self-sustaining independent nation because of tribal
> > religions and traditions that simply insist upon disagreeing with one
> > another, rather than joining forces in order to fight the much larger
> > outside carbon footprint forces that are continually taking advantage
> > of the situation.
>
> I recycle and continue to do more than my share of caring for the
> environment.
> And you? When was the last time you planted a tree?
>
> Eric
On my acreage I plant and care for trees all the time, and then some.
I also have a dozen some odd growing Christmas trees, because those
are the only ones we ever bought.
btw, Hitler planted trees, as well as having nicely painted those
onto canvas. Hitler was actually a much better artist than any
warlord.
Your perpetual and/or systematic lack of benevolence is noted, but
than so was that of Hitler's, GW Bush and Dick Cheney. So, at least
you're in good company.
What exactly are you doing about my hollow moon?
~ BG
BradGuth
> Where’s the objective evidence that our Selene/moon is not the least
>
> Where's our public funded science pertaining to the Earth-moon L1
>
> Since most everything original about our Apollo mission obtained
> science is either missing or remains as need-to-know or inaccessible,
> where's the other 99.9% of our public funded LRO science?
And why did I bother to say the exact same things as of nearly a
decade ago, that our naked, crystal dry and highly electrostatic
charged lunar surface of such dark and unusual mineral deposits, along
-
is more inert dead and even colder than the subdued core of Mars. For
the moment, I’ve estimated a lunar surface heat flux of 3.536 mw/m2.
http://spaceflightnow.com/news/n0912/20lroresults/
"The moon has one of the most extreme thermal environments of any
body in the solar system," said David Paige, principal investigator
for the Diviner payload at the University of California, Los Angeles.
In October, Diviner detected a cold trap in Hermite crater with
temperatures of nearly -415 degrees Fahrenheit.
"To put that kind of temperature into perspective, nothing like this
has ever yet been measured in the solar system," Paige said. "One
would have to maybe travel far beyond the Kuiper Belt to find an
object with a temperature this low."
-
I find it most interesting that so many of our best scientists are
suddenly at shock and awe or amazement as to what levels of cold and
radiation risk our moon has to offer anyone standing upon its naked
surface, especially as surrounded by all that unusually dense
assortment of raw elements that’ll unavoidably turn cosmic energy into
everything from soft X-rays to gamma., plus whatever our sun
contributes directly and otherwise causing everything from the
secondary/recoil IR of 1200 w/m2 to that of hard X-rays that can
easily become lethal saturation within as little as hours or even
worse case minutes worth of exposure. Oddly, not one frame of any
Kodak film from our Apollo era showed us any hint of such radiation
dosage, as though it wasn’t even measurable.
The most flexible of moonsuit materials would become so cold that at
25K they could crack or even shatter. (that’s significantly colder
than liquid nitrogen of 63K)
My previous suggestions of digging in so as to having thermal
stability and a few meters worth of basalt between your frail DNA and
all of that surrounding surface radiation exposure was just
foolishness on my part. However, in many places the crust/bedrock or
composite soil of our physically dark moon is likely several times
more background radioactive than Earth, so as not being exactly inert
or failsafe even if you’re entirely situated deep underground.
Essentially, it’s as though that moon is not made of Earth because
some locations as offering thorium, uranium and radium deposits upon
or within that moon will simply have to be avoided regardless of being
dug in.
So, just because the moon is potentially 0.1% hollow doesn’t insure
that your frail DNA is going to be entirely safe in all such hollow
locations. Such harmful mineral ores and deposits of whatever’s
radioactive should have been easily mapped as of 4+ decades ago,
because the sufficient technology existed, at least to within a km2
resolution, and as of most recently a surface resolution of 10 x 10 or
100 m2 should have this surface background dosage nailed as to what
sorts of heavy minerals and radioactive substances exist. Even the UV
fluorescence imaging and subsequent mapping of surface minerals should
have been well established by now, in far greater detail than ever
before.
BradGuth
> Where’s the objective evidence that our Selene/moon is not the least
> bit hollow? (solid as a rock seems rather unlikely)
> Where's our public funded science pertaining to the Earth-moon L1
> (Selene L1)? In other words, how hot and what's the vacuum like?
> Since most everything original about our Apollo mission obtained
> science is either missing or remains as need-to-know or inaccessible,
> where's the other 99.9% of our public funded LRO science?
And why did I bother to say these exact same things as of nearly a
decade ago, that our naked, crystal dry and highly electrostatic
charged lunar surface of such dark and unusually dense mineral
deposits, along with its issues of significant mascons plus
unavoidable secondary/recoil forms of radiation that’s coming at you
-
-
25K they could crack or even shatter. (25K is significantly colder
Nightcrawler
<Guthdrivel snipped>
Still seeking someone affirm your insanity, Guth?
BradGuth
Just sharing and expecting constructive feedback from the few of us
that are not devout ZNRs.
~ BG
Nightcrawler
> Just sharing and expecting constructive feedback from the few of us
> that are not devout ZNRs.
So, you are looking for other escapees from the insane asylum to
tell you that you are sane.
You really do have a problem with definitions, don't you?
BradGuth
No boot camp for you, as ZNR qualified or rather overqualified is
clearly the case with yourself and others of your kind.
BradGuth
Odd there's not a peep of anything constructive about this colder than
liquid nitrogen environment. At 25K there should also be solids of
pure oxygen and even crystal solids of Radon starting at 200K.
Too bad we don’t have a surface probe reporting back from that cold
spot.
BradGuth
Odd there's not a peep of anything constructive about this colder than
liquid nitrogen environment. At 25K there should also be loads of dry
ice plus solids of pure oxygen and even crystal solids of Radon
starting at 200K.
Too bad we don’t have a surface probe reporting back from that cold
spot.
Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG / “Guth Usenet”
BradGuth
if there’s ongoing mineral compressions, decay and those pesky
radioactive elements that coexist and thereby unavoidably produce
various gasses, along with an off-center core that couldn’t have tidal
migrated without leaving a porous interior of voids behind)
Apparently our moon(Selene) also has hidden hydrogen peroxide(h2o2)
within its >25 K cold traps, in that its decomposition release (such
as triggered by way of the LCROSS surface impactor) provided those
detectable hydroxyl radicals.
“The ultraviolet visible spectrometer detected hydroxyl signatures
just after impact that are consistent with a water vapor cloud in
sunlight.”
But where's our public funded science pertaining to the Earth-moon L1
(Selene L1)? In other words, how extra hot or ultra cold and what's
all that ultra-extreme vacuum like?
If those polar cold traps are suggesting an environment near 25 K (as
reported by our LRO team of NASA approved wizards), then perhaps <3%
of the time the Selene L1 environment might become considerably
colder, as well as offering a vacuum of at least 3e-21 bar (a million
fold less pressure than the lunar surface), which should only pull
more heat out of that tidal enhanced near absolute vacuum environment,
as well as otherwise allowing more heat in whenever exposed to direct
plus indirect sunlight (including moon IR and earthshine) that’s
available 97+% of the time.
Since most everything original about our Apollo mission R&D and their
obtained science along with their half century advanced technology is
either missing, remains as need-to-know or public nondisclosure/
inaccessible, where's the other 99.9% of our public funded LRO
science?
Most of our Apollo missions were those surrounded by a physically dark
as coal lunar terrain, as having converted the bulk of solar energy
into secondary IR worth an average 1218 w/m2 (you’ll simply have to
disregard all those mission images as having that surface albedo of 65+
% and offering nothing UV reactive). Otherwise such heat is heat
(including earthshine that’s <50 times greater intensity than
moonlight), and otherwise it’s exactly the same as being here on Earth
except as if you were surrounded on all sides (including top to bottom
by an array of 1218 watt/m2 radiant heat within each and every visible
square meter for as far as the eye can see, as well as supposedly
having essentially no significant atmospheric attenuation, as so much
so toasty that even in the shade it would have remained extremely hot
from all of that unavoidable surrounding secondary IR radiation.
“LRO takes measurements from an altitude of about 31 miles, so
researchers are not sure what dosages astronauts will see at the
surface”
Actually the direct solar energy of 1367 w/m2 (as raw/naked average
solar energy w/UV is perhaps closer to 1630 w/m2) was also
unavoidable. As equally the ultra extreme cold of what’s continually
shaded within a deep polar crater being a low as >25 K (22 mw/m2) is
obviously an example where as little as 4.7 mw/m2 of geothermal energy
is available from that thick polar crust.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Solar_Spectrum.png
And why did I bother to say these exact same things as of nearly a
decade ago, that our naked, crystal dry and highly electrostatic
charged lunar surface of such physically dark and unusually dense
mineral deposits, along with its issues of those significant mascons
plus unavoidable secondary/recoil forms of local radiation that’s
-
is perhaps more inert dead and subsequently colder than the subdued
core of Mars. For the moment, I’ve estimated a lunar polar surface
“cold trap” heat flux of >4.7 mw/m2 (surrounding terrain of secondary/
recoil IR making the LRO readings worth <22 mw/m2)
.
http://spaceflightnow.com/news/n0912/20lroresults/
"The moon has one of the most extreme thermal environments of any
body in the solar system," said David Paige, principal investigator
for the Diviner payload at the University of California, Los Angeles.
In October, Diviner detected a cold trap in Hermite crater with
temperatures of nearly -415 degrees Fahrenheit.
"To put that kind of temperature into perspective, nothing like this
has ever yet been measured in the solar system," Paige said. "One
would have to maybe travel far beyond the Kuiper Belt to find an
object with a temperature this low."
-
I’m finding it most interesting that so many of our best scientists
are suddenly at shock and awe or other amazement as to what levels of
extreme hot and cold and radiation risk our moon has to offer anyone
standing upon its naked surface, especially as surrounded by all that
unusually dense assortment of raw elements that’ll unavoidably turn
cosmic energy into everything from soft X-rays to gamma., plus
whatever our sun contributes directly and otherwise causing everything
from the secondary/recoil IR average of 1217+ w/m2 (maximum 1452 w/m2)
to that of hard X-rays that can rather easily become lethal saturation
within as little as hours or even worse case minutes worth of
exposure. Oddly, not one frame of any X-ray sensitive Kodak film from
our Apollo era showed us any hint of such radiation dosage or even
thermal trauma, as though it wasn’t even measurable or otherwise worth
any further review.
In the polar crater shade, the most flexible of moonsuit synthetic
materials would become so cryogenic at 25 K they (whereas most gasses
become liquids or solids) could crack or even cause artificial
materials to shatter. (25 K is significantly colder than liquid
nitrogen of 63 K), and a meter above that rather poorly warmed surface
of such 3e-15 bar vacuum should be an even colder.
Apparently my previous suggestions of digging in so as to having
thermal stability and a few meters worth of basalt between your frail
DNA and all of that surrounding surface radiation exposure was just
foolishness on my part. However, in many places that unusual crust/
bedrock or composite soil of our physically dark moon is likely
several times more background radioactive than Earth (exactly as
though that moon isn’t nearly as old as Earth), so as for not being
exactly inert or failsafe to human DNA even if you’re entirely
situated deep underground. Essentially, it’s as though that moon is
not made of Earth because, some of the gamma spectrographic mapped
locations as offering thorium, uranium and radium deposits upon or
within that moon will simply have to be avoided regardless of being
dug in.
So, just because the moon is potentially 0.1% hollow doesn’t insure
that your frail DNA is going to be entirely safe within all such
naturally or artificially made hollow locations. Potentially harmful
mineral ores and deposits of whatever’s radioactive should have been
easily mapped as of 4+ decades ago, because the sufficient technology
having existed, at least to within a km2 resolution, and as of most
recently a surface resolution of 10 x 10 or 100 m2 should have this
surface background dosage nailed as to what sorts of heavy minerals
and radioactive substances exist, and even to what likely depths. The
UV fluorescence imaging and subsequent mapping of surface minerals
should have been well established by now, by LRO in far greater detail
than ever before.
Odd there's not a peep of anything constructive about this colder than
liquid nitrogen environment. At the cryogenic 25 K environment should
accommodate loads of dry ice (solid CO2) plus solids of pure oxygen
and perhaps even crystal solids of Radon starting at 200 K (because
that moon does have its own radium plus numerous surface deposits).
However, we can't even seem to deploy surface probes as safely soft-
landed onto our physically dark moon(Selene) that offers direct
readings from those polar craters of 25 K (that's actually way colder
than liquid nitrogen), suggesting the moon itself is giving off
something much less than 22 mw/m2.
At 25 K there's a lot of potentially insulating gas (greenhouse gas)
keeping such deep crater shadowed “cold traps” warmer than otherwise
possible. (at 25 K even liquid nitrogen is going to be insulative)
Too bad we don’t have any surface probe(s) reporting continuous
objective data back from such extreme cold spots. It’s almost as
though we actually do not have the necessary expertise and required
technology of deploying such robotic probe landers. Also, we should
only further imagine the terrific Stirling solar energy conversion at
near 375 K differential/m2 (1000 m2 focused onto a hydrogen boiler and
those unlimited cold energy sinks of something near 25 K is going to
easily generate 821 kw of nearly continuous clean energy to do
whatever with).
The S3TEC Center of ongoing research offers <85.4% conversion, whereas
it seems likely 1.2 MW per thousand m2 is technically obtainable,
especially if such advanced PVs were applied on the most elevated
lunar polar surface, whereas that sunlight is nearly continuous and
still saturated with UV that PVs love to convert into electrons.
http://s3tec.mit.edu/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=81&Itemid=100
Nightcrawler
> Where�s the objective evidence that our Selene/moon is not the least
Where's the objective evidence that Guthball has a brain?
BradGuth
> On 1/2/2010 12:07 PM, BradGuth wrote:
>
>
> Where's the objective evidence that Guthball has a brain?
"Our 99% hollow head of Guthball once again spewed..."
In other words, you've still got nothing whatsoever.
Why don't you knock our socks off with the best available science
you've got?
How about some public funded supercomputer simulations, of how such a
thick and mineral saturated crust as having quickly solidified,
evolves along with a tidal offset core (supposedly of hot iron), and
remains today as a passive solid without internal fluids (meaning
crystal dry), as well as gasless and otherwise solid as any inert
(zero decay) rock that's no longer affected by whatever tidal morphing
or gravity compression forces?
~ BG
Nightcrawler
<More enane rambling snipped>
Hey, dimbulb, ever read this report?
BradGuth
Been there, done that NASA infomercial that was created for the
LeapFrog certified likes of yourself, but thanks anyway.
Ever heard of a geode rock?
Earth has lots of nifty cavities and terrific geode pockets that are
really big, not to mention those empty oil, gas and vast volumes of
fresh water aquifer cavities that are near empty or having been
seawater flooded. Thus far we've uncovered and/or having mapped the
natural volumetric extent of perhaps <0.1% of what's available (should
the need arise).
~ BG
Nightcrawler
Weeeeeeeeeeee.
BradGuth
Ever heard of vogs?
Ever studied geology-101?
Ever read a National Geographic?
Ever give an honest shit about anything, other than yourself?
~ BG
BradGuth
Sorry about my vog brain-fart (make that "vugs")
Ever heard of vugs?
BradGuth
plus geode pockets that are really big, not to mention those empty
oil, gas, coal and other mineral wells/shafts and mines, plus
otherwise terrific volumes of fresh water aquifer cavities that are
near empty or having been intentionally seawater flooded. Thus far
we've uncovered and/or having mapped the natural volumetric extent of
and less dumbfounded ones could survive underground).
On behalf of those stuck in perpetual naysay, obfuscation and denial:
Ever heard of vugs?
Ever heard of a geode rock?
Ever studied Earth geology-101?
Ever read a National Geographic?
Ever give an honest shit about anything, other than yourself?
~ BG
> http://s3tec.mit.edu/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=81&...
Nightcrawler
> Ever heard of vogs?
>
> Ever studied geology-101?
>
> Ever read a National Geographic?
>
> Ever give an honest shit about anything, other than yourself?
Quit talking to/about yourself. It makes you look bad.
BradGuth
> On 1/2/2010 4:15 PM, BradGuth wrote:
>
>
> > Ever studied geology-101?
>
> > Ever read a National Geographic?
>
> > Ever give an honest shit about anything, other than yourself?
>
> Quit talking to/about yourself. It makes you look bad.
You wish. Perhaps you can demonstrate whatever individual expertise
you have to offer. (there's a first time for everything)
Earth has lots of nifty cavities and terrific volcanic formed voids,
plus geode pockets that are really big, not to mention those empty
oil, gas, coal and other mineral wells/shafts and mines, plus
otherwise terrific volumes of fresh water aquifer cavities that are
near empty or having been intentionally seawater flooded. Thus far
we've uncovered and/or having mapped the natural volumetric extent of
perhaps <0.1% of what's available (should the need arise, the smart
and less dumbfounded ones could survive underground).
On behalf of those stuck in perpetual naysay, obfuscation and denial:
Ever heard of vugs?
Ever heard of a geode rock?
Ever studied Earth geology-101?
Ever read a National Geographic?
Ever give an honest shit about anything, other than yourself?
~ BG
Nightcrawler
> On behalf of those stuck in perpetual naysay, obfuscation and denial:
> Ever heard of vugs?
> Ever heard of a geode rock?
> Ever studied Earth geology-101?
> Ever read a National Geographic?
> Ever give an honest shit about anything, other than yourself?
Ever not repeat yourself less than three or four times?
Regardless, your examples don't make for *hollow*.
Nomen Publicus
> On Jan 2, 11:22�am, Nightcrawler <Dirtyde...@dirtcheap.net> wrote:
>> On 1/2/2010 12:54 PM, BradGuth wrote:
>>
>> <More enane rambling snipped>
>>
>> Hey, dimbulb, ever read this report?
>>
>> http://www.solarviews.com/eng/moonpr1.htm
>
> Been there, done that NASA infomercial that was created for the
> LeapFrog certified likes of yourself, but thanks anyway.
>
> Ever heard of a geode rock?
>
> Earth has lots of nifty cavities and terrific geode pockets that are
> really big, not to mention those empty oil, gas and vast volumes of
> fresh water aquifer cavities that are near empty or having been
> seawater flooded.
You are aware that the extraction of oil, gas and water from underground
doesn't leave big, empty holes? It's not like mining coal.
> Thus far we've uncovered and/or having mapped the
> natural volumetric extent of perhaps <0.1% of what's available (should
> the need arise).
>
> ~ BG
--
Most religions prophecy the end of the world and then consistently
work together to ensure that these prophecies come true. -- Anonymous
BradGuth
wrote:
I'm also aware of those much deeper NG reserves that are locked up in
shale, that isn't easily extracted without extensive drilling plus
substantial hydraulic explosive/seismic-shock methods that also
releases various heavy toxins into the surrounding ground water.
However, there are many cavernous reserves that are nearly empty or
simply having been displaced with fluids or CO2 pumped in, or
backfilled by natural seepage. Mineral/element extractions and of
course hydrocarbon solids represent the vast bulk of those artificial
underground volumes.
In addition to various heavy/toxic element disposals (usually upon
nearby surface or used as landfill) and the excessive venting of raw
methane that includes radon and helium as well as "ethane, propane,
butanes, pentanes and higher molecular weight hydrocarbons, elemental
sulfur, carbon dioxide", there's global hard-rock mining of uranium
alone that has generated >1e7m3 of tailings worth 10<100 Bq/gram,
that's only going to get worse as the demand for nuclear fuel
increases.
--
Religions that usually fail to police their own kind should be treated
as any cabal/mafia or commercial cartel, thus regulated and taxed
accordingly. -- Brad Guth
BradGuth
Your narrow mindset and fully obfuscation founded naysay
interpretation is noted.
btw; 3e-15 bar creates a great deal of suction, or lift against that
robust lunar crust that you claim is as solid as any fused basalt can
possibly get. (I wonder what's underneath)
How much larger would an empty party balloon get, if having been tied
off at essentially 1 bar (14.8 psi absolute), in other words pre-
inflated at 0.1 psi, and subsequently released on the moon?
~ BG
Nightcrawler
> btw; 3e-15 bar creates a great deal of suction, or lift against that
> robust lunar crust that you claim is as solid as any fused basalt can
> possibly get. (I wonder what's underneath)
What suction? Lift? Bwahahaha.
What claim?
>
> How much larger would an empty party balloon get, if having been tied
> off at essentially 1 bar (14.8 psi absolute), in other words pre-
> inflated at 0.1 psi, and subsequently released on the moon?
So much for the empty balloon. It would appear that you want to have
your cake, and eat it too.
BradGuth
> On 1/3/2010 10:11 AM, BradGuth wrote:
>
> > btw; 3e-15 bar creates a great deal of suction, or lift against that
> > robust lunar crust that you claim is as solid as any fused basalt can
> > possibly get. (I wonder what's underneath)
>
> What suction? Lift? Bwahahaha.
saturated basalt crust, that you claim isn't the least bit porous or
otherwise hollow, that the interior of our moon(Selene) is at
something equal or less than 3e-15 bar?
>
> What claim?
That's right, silly old me, as you never claim anything unless it's
100% scripted within your NASA/Apollo bible.
>
> > How much larger would an empty party balloon get, if having been tied
> > off at essentially 1 bar (14.8 psi absolute), in other words pre-
> > inflated at 0.1 psi, and subsequently released on the moon?
>
> So much for the empty balloon. It would appear that you want to have
> your cake, and eat it too.
I happen to like cake, as long as it doesn't have too much icing.
Otherwise you are correct, whereas that initial 0.1 psi (minimal)
filled balloon would have instantly expanded beyond its molecular
elastic shell capacity when released into that 3e-15 bar environment.
So, your best swag as to how much pressure or gravity induced
compression should exist below that supposedly solid/fused lunar crust
that's <120 km thick (average of ~ 60 km)?
~ BG
Nightcrawler
<snip crap>
1) Define suction.
2) Define void.
3) Define vacuum.
4) Define hollow.
5) Formulate a real example of how they *all* interact.
6) Show how this interaction occurs on the moon and exerts
a force (not pressure) that is vectored in a direction
perpendicular to the surface of the moon, outward from
the center of the moon.
BradGuth
Gee whiz, now you expect me to be another Einstein, right off the top
of by little head none the less. You do realize that I'm only
suggesting a 0.1% hollow/void worthy interior.
Moon interior open space as geode like hollows/voids w/air at 14.7
psi:
14.7 psi = 10.335e3 kgf/m2 (x 6 becomes a force worth holding up 62 t/
m2)
Exterior Vacuum at 3e-15 bar = 1.2e-12 inch h2o = 3.06e-15 kgf/cm2
Otherwise negative pull or suction of 14.7 psi (10.335e3 kgf/m2) = 62
t/m2
Assuming this mineral saturated lunar basalt is that of a sufficiently
fused molecular kind of solid that’s only leaking sodium, whereas
1/6th gravity should become worth 124 tonnes/m2 of holding that lunar
basalt shell up/away from the porous or semi-hollow mantel and its
tidal offset core, as such is going to lift or hold up a serious
amount of that basalt crust per km2 (124e6 tonnes/km2), not to mention
whatever interior pressure below that thick and heavy crust should by
rights be something considerably greater than 14.7 psi.
Due to the crust porosity and various mineral leakage as having
allowed some degree of subsequent pressure/vacuum equalization,
whereas even I might doubt that we’d get anywhere near that kind of
result, but it’s certainly fun to ponder.
Seems it’s going to be a little tough for our moon(Selene) not to have
those cavernous hollows/voids of some kind, at least a few solidified
geode like pockets, porous layers or accessible vugs within and under
that extremely thick and robust basalt crust, especially where that
supposedly iron core has shifted at least several percent (<25%)
towards Earth in order to help offset that much thicker and mascon
saturated farside crust.
The farside mass offset of this unusually heavy mineral saturated
basalt crust is worth <4e21 kg, and the maximum <450 km radii of the
metallic core is supposedly worth 4<5e21 kg (more than likely it’s
only worth <4e21 kg). Therefore this dense metallic core of supposed
iron needs to be considerably offset towards Earth, so that the
greater proportion of lunar mass is always facing Earth.
~ BG
Nightcrawler
> Moon interior open space as geode like hollows/voids w/air at 14.7
> psi:
> 14.7 psi = 10.335e3 kgf/m2 (x 6 becomes a force worth holding up 62 t/
> m2)
Just as an aside, what made the "open" space in these geode like
hollows 14.7 psi?
Double-A
> On Jan 3, 11:56 am, Nightcrawler <Dirtyde...@dirtcheap.net> wrote:
>
> > On 1/3/2010 12:05 PM, BradGuth wrote:
>
> > <snip crap>
>
> > 1) Define suction.
> > 2) Define void.
> > 3) Define vacuum.
> > 4) Define hollow.
> > 5) Formulate a real example of how they *all* interact.
> > 6) Show how this interaction occurs on the moon and exerts
> > a force (not pressure) that is vectored in a direction
> > perpendicular to the surface of the moon, outward from
> > the center of the moon.
>
> Gee whiz, now you expect me to be another Einstein, right off the top
> of by little head none the less. You do realize that I'm only
> suggesting a 0.1% hollow/void worthy interior.
He didn't specifically ask for mathematical definitions. Can't you
explain suck in terms of chrome and trailer hitches?
> Moon interior open space as geode like hollows/voids w/air at 14.7
> psi:
> 14.7 psi = 10.335e3 kgf/m2 (x 6 becomes a force worth holding up 62 t/
> m2)
Hmmm. That's about 1 bar. What a coincidence!
So, where is the green cheese factory?
Double-A
BradGuth
> On Jan 3, 12:47 pm, BradGuth <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Jan 3, 11:56 am, Nightcrawler <Dirtyde...@dirtcheap.net> wrote:
>
> > > On 1/3/2010 12:05 PM, BradGuth wrote:
>
> > > <snip crap>
>
> > > 1) Define suction.
> > > 2) Define void.
> > > 3) Define vacuum.
> > > 4) Define hollow.
> > > 5) Formulate a real example of how they *all* interact.
> > > 6) Show how this interaction occurs on the moon and exerts
> > > a force (not pressure) that is vectored in a direction
> > > perpendicular to the surface of the moon, outward from
> > > the center of the moon.
>
> > Gee whiz, now you expect me to be another Einstein, right off the top
> > of by little head none the less. You do realize that I'm only
> > suggesting a 0.1% hollow/void worthy interior.
>
> He didn't specifically ask for mathematical definitions. Can't you
> explain suck in terms of chrome and trailer hitches?
>
> > Moon interior open space as geode like hollows/voids w/air at 14.7
> > psi:
> > 14.7 psi = 10.335e3 kgf/m2 (x 6 becomes a force worth holding up 62 t/
> > m2)
>
> Hmmm. That's about 1 bar. What a coincidence!
It was just given as an example, although I'd favor <100 bar because
so little O2 percentage would be required (<1% O2 and >99% H2), of
which our moon(Selene) can't possibly be shy of those O2 and H2
elements.
Obviously that "green cheese factory" is inside where it's perfectly
cozy and otherwise perfectly safer than here on Eden/Earth.
~ BG
BradGuth
That was merely my constructive suggestion, such as derived from
natural geology produced gasses or from being artificially injected
with an atmosphere in order to benefit human habitat usage.
Your NASA claims that the thick and robust basalt crust of our naked
moon(Selene) contains loads of water (<250 ppm essentially right at
the surface none the less), as well as there being a host of
radioactive plus other reactive elements to boot. So, I don't see any
problem in that lunar geology as having evolved with its fair share of
such geode and vug like voids (especially since it supposedly cooled
off so fast), or at the very least having substantially porous layers
to work with.
~ BG
BradGuth
> Where’s the objective evidence that our Selene/moon is not the least
> bit hollow?
>
> (Selene L1) environment?
>
> Since most everything original about our Apollo mission obtained
> where's the other 99.9% of our public funded LRO science?
>
What’s not holding up that robust lunar crust?
Moon interior open space as geode like hollows/voids w/air at 14.7
psi:
14.7 psi = 10.335e3 kgf/m2 (x 6 becomes a force worth holding up 62 t/
m2)
Exterior Vacuum at 3e-15 bar = 1.2e-12 inch h2o = 3.06e-15 kgf/cm2
Otherwise a negative pull or suction of 14.7 psi (10.335e3 kgf/m2) =
62 t/m2
Not that any thick and mineral saturated form of fused basalt crust is
ever going to easily collapse under it's own mass, especially not at
1/6th gravity (even less gravity below that crust), and of course
better yet if the average interior atmosphere of whatever pockets or
voids of gasses were <100 bar (1470 psi) shouldn’t be unexpected.
BradGuth
>
> > bit hollow, or at least sufficiently porous?
>
> Where's the objective evidence that Guthball has a brain?
What exactly is not holding up that robust lunar crust?
Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG / “Guth Usenet”
BradGuth
>
> What’s not holding up that robust lunar crust?
>
> at 14.7 psi = 10.335e3 kgf/m2 (x 6 becomes a force worth holding up
Where’s the hard objective evidence that our Selene/moon is not the
least bit hollow? (solid as a rock seems rather highly unlikely,
especially if there’s ongoing mineral compressions, chemical
interactions and the usual decay into gaseous elements, plus always
those pesky radioactive elements that coexist and thereby unavoidably
produce heat and various gasses, along with an off-center core that
couldn’t have tidal migrated without leaving a more porous or vug
populated interior farside of geological voids behind). Essentially,
the porosity or natural voidness of our moon(Selene) is anything but a
closed book.
Apparently our moon(Selene) also has hidden hydrogen peroxide(h2o2)
within its >25 K cold traps, in that its decomposition release (such
as triggered by way of the LCROSS surface impactor) provided those
detectable hydroxyl radicals as having suggested a 24 gallon release
of basalt encapsulated water.
“The ultraviolet visible spectrometer detected hydroxyl signatures
just after impact that are consistent with a water vapor cloud in
sunlight.”
But where's our public funded science pertaining to the Earth-moon L1
(Selene L1)? In other words, how extra hot or ultra cold and what's
all that ultra-extreme vacuum like?
If those polar cold traps are suggesting an environment near 25 K (as
reported by our LRO team of NASA approved wizards), then perhaps <3%
of the time the Selene L1 environment might become considerably
colder, as well as offering a vacuum of at least 3e-21 bar (a million
fold less pressure than the lunar surface), which should only pull
more heat out of that tidal enhanced near absolute vacuum environment,
as well as otherwise allowing more heat in whenever exposed to direct
plus indirect sunlight (including moon IR and earthshine) that’s
available 97+% of the time.
Since most everything original about our Apollo mission R&D and their
obtained science along with their half century advanced technology is
either missing, remains as need-to-know or public nondisclosure/
inaccessible, where's the other 99.9% of our public funded LRO
science?
Most of our Apollo missions were those surrounded by a physically dark
as coal lunar terrain, as having converted the bulk of solar energy
into secondary IR, worth an average 1218 w/m2 (you’ll simply have to
disregard all those mission images as having that surface albedo of 65+
% and offering nothing UV reactive). Otherwise such heat is heat
(including earthshine that’s <50 times greater visual intensity than
moonlight), and otherwise it’s exactly the same as being here on Earth
except as if you were surrounded on all sides (including top to bottom
by an array of 1218 watt/m2 radiant heat within each and every visible
square meter for as far as the eye can see, as well as supposedly
having essentially no significant atmospheric attenuation, as so much
so toasty that even in the shade it would have remained extremely hot
from all of that unavoidable surrounding secondary IR radiation.
“LRO takes measurements from an altitude of about 31 miles, so
researchers are not sure what dosages astronauts will see at the
surface”
-
Actually the direct solar energy of 1367 w/m2 (as raw/naked average
solar energy w/UV is perhaps worth something closer to 1630 w/m2) was
-
recoil IR making their LRO remote readings of >25 K worth <22 mw/m2)
.
http://spaceflightnow.com/news/n0912/20lroresults/
"The moon has one of the most extreme thermal environments of any
body in the solar system," said David Paige, principal investigator
for the Diviner payload at the University of California, Los Angeles.
In October, Diviner detected a cold trap in Hermite crater with
temperatures of nearly -415 degrees Fahrenheit.
"To put that kind of temperature into perspective, nothing like this
has ever yet been measured in the solar system," Paige said. "One
would have to maybe travel far beyond the Kuiper Belt to find an
object with a temperature this low."
-
I’m finding it most interesting that so many of our best scientists
are suddenly at shock and awe or that of some other amazement as to
what levels of extreme hot and cold and radiation risk our moon has to
offer anyone standing upon its naked and highly electrostatic charged
surface, especially as surrounded by all that unusually dense
assortment of relatively dark raw elements that’ll unavoidably turn
cosmic energy into everything from soft X-rays to gamma., plus
whatever dosage our sun contributes directly and otherwise causing
everything from the secondary/recoil IR average of 1217+ w/m2 (maximum
1452 w/m2) to that of hard X-rays that can rather easily become lethal
saturation within as little as hours or even worse case from minutes
worth of exposure. Oddly, not one frame of any X-ray sensitive Kodak
film or sensitive vidicon obtained imaging from our Apollo era showed
us any hint of such radiation dosage or even thermal trauma, as though
it wasn’t even measurable or otherwise worth any further review, and
oddly there never was any hit of hot sodium either.
In that polar crater shade, the most flexible of moonsuit synthetic
materials would become so cryogenic stiff at 25 K (whereas most gasses
become liquids or solids) they could crack or even cause most
artificial materials to potentially shatter. (25 K is after all
significantly colder than liquid nitrogen of 63 K), and perhaps a
meter above that rather poorly warmed surface of such 3e-15 bar vacuum
should be an even colder.
Apparently my previous suggestions of digging in so as to always
having thermal stability and a few rad-protective meters worth of
basalt between your frail DNA and all of that surrounding surface
radiation exposure was just foolishness on my part. However, in many
places that unusual crust/bedrock or composite soil of our physically
dark moon is likely several times more background radioactive than
Earth (exactly as though that moon isn’t nearly as old as Earth), so
as for such natural or artificial holes or cavities not being exactly
inert or failsafe to human DNA even if you’re entirely situated deep
underground. Essentially, it’s as though that moon is not made
entirely of Earth like minerals and raw elements because, some of the
gamma spectrographic mapped locations as offering thorium, uranium and
radium deposits upon or within that moon will simply have to be
avoided regardless of your being dug in.
So, just because the moon is potentially 0.1% hollow doesn’t insure
that your frail DNA is going to be entirely safe within all such
naturally or artificially made hollow locations. Potentially harmful
mineral ores and deposits of whatever’s radioactive should have been
easily mapped as of 4+ decades ago, because the sufficient technology
having existed, at least to within a km2 resolution, and as of most
recently a surface resolution of 10 x 10 or 100 m2 should have this
surface background dosage nailed as to what sorts of heavy minerals
and radioactive substances exist, and even to what likely depths. The
UV fluorescence imaging and subsequent mapping of surface minerals
should have been well established by now, by LRO in far greater detail
than ever before.
Odd there's not hardly a peep of anything constructive about this
colder than liquid nitrogen environment. At this cryogenic 25 K
environment should accommodate loads of dry ice (solid CO2) plus
solids of pure oxygen and perhaps even crystal solids of Radon
starting below the 200 K LRn222 mark (because that moon does have its
own radium plus numerous surface deposits).
However, we can't even seem to deploy surface probes of less than one
tenth the mass of previous nearside surface probes, as safely soft-
landed onto our physically dark moon(Selene) that offers direct
readings from those polar craters of 25 K (that's actually 38 K colder
than liquid nitrogen), suggesting the moon itself is giving off
something much less than 22 mw/m2.
At 25 K there's a lot of potentially insulating CO2, N2, Kr, Xe, Ar
and to some degree Rn222 gas, and perhaps even conceivably the hydride
of NH3/ammonia (as supposed greenhouse gasses) keeping such deep
crater shadowed “cold traps” as always warmer than otherwise possible.
(at 25 K even liquid nitrogen is going to be insulative)
Too bad we don’t have any surface probe(s) reporting continuous/live
objective data back from such extreme cold spots. It’s almost as
though we actually do not have the necessary expertise and required
technology of deploying such robotic probe landers. Also, we should
only further imagine the terrific Stirling solar energy conversions at
near 375 K differential (1000 m2 of sun focused onto a hydrogen boiler
and those unlimited cold energy sinks of something near 25 K is going
to easily generate 821 kw of nearly continuous clean energy to do
whatever with).
The S3TEC Center of ongoing research offers <85.4% conversion, whereas
it seems likely 1.2 MW per thousand m2 is technically obtainable,
especially if such advanced PVs were applied as solar tracking arrays
configured on the most elevated of lunar polar surfaces, whereas that
sunlight is nearly continuous and still saturated with UV that PVs
love to convert into electrons.
http://s3tec.mit.edu/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=81&Itemid=100
BradGuth
> On Dec 13, 9:05 am, BradGuth <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Dec 11, 11:46 am, BradGuth <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Nov 27, 11:13 am, BradGuth <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > On Nov 6, 10:56 pm, BradGuth <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > Where’s the objective evidence that our Selene/moon is not the least
> > > > > bit hollow?
>
> > > > > Where's our public funded science pertaining to the Earth-moon L1
> > > > > (Selene L1)?
>
> > > > > Since most everything original about our Apollo mission obtained
> > > > > where's the other 99.9% of our public funded LRO science?
>
>
> > > > Just because our moon should be at least 0.1% hollow doesn't mean that
> > > > others can subjectively insist that it's 100% solid through and
> > > > through, and otherwise get away with their systematic topic/author
> > > > stalking and bashing without consequences.
>
> > > > Perhaps it’s a good thing that we still do not have any science
> > > > platform of instruments or much less any space-habitat and physics lab
> > > > situated within the Earth-moon L1 (Selene L1), because we’d just know
> > > > a whole lot more about Earth as well as our unusual moon, and
> > > > otherwise having the best possible zero delta-V location that’s always
> > > > on plain sight and so nearby, of course always representing zero
> > > > gravity (other than its own internal mass) and offering that near
> > > > absolute vacuum of 3e-21 bar. Otherwise the LSE-CM/ISS as space
> > > > elevator to/from our physically dark and nasty old moon as well as
> > > > providing the zero delta-V outpost/gateway/(Clarke Station) of Selene
> > > > L1 couldn’t be utilized for much of anything except making us a cool
> > > > trillion in profit per year.
>
> > > > As far as this 0.1% hollow moon conjecture is just plain old geology
> > > > and physics, of deductive logic that’s based upon the best available
> > > > science which seems entirely doable to those of us with an open
> > > > mindset and a willingness to pursue viable alternatives to otherwise
> > > > doing absolutely nothing.
>
> > > > This other humongous geoengineering via moon relocation project
> > > > funding, at most representing an investment demand of $1000 from each
> > > > and every person on Earth is worth $6.75 trillion, prorated as per a
> > > > given century is just a whopping $10/year (less than $1/month).
>
> > > > If less than $1/month is still too much of your hard earned loot to
> > > > ask for, in order to manage the entire long-term salvation of Earth,
> > > > and a whole lot more technological advancements as value returned
> > > > because of having multiple tethered elevators as well as offering at
> > > > least two zero delta-V outpost/gateways and those easily managed
> > > > science platforms as well as contributing loads of nifty astronomy
> > > > plus spacious off-world habitats associated within these robust
> > > > tethered stations, plus those extra spacious units upon/within our
> > > > Selene/moon that's interactively parked within Earth L1, then who am I
> > > > to suggest otherwise.
>
> > > > I’m pretty certain that I could drop any number of impressive names
> > > > and investigative research groups that would have to agree with me,
> > > > but then if your ulterior motivated mindset as naysay or that of an
> > > > obfuscation done deal that’s forever locked into denial, such as in
> > > > the words of GW Bush “so what’s the difference” (whereas obviously the
> > > > ends justify the means), then I’ve got nothing for you and others of
> > > > your kind that’ll make any difference.
>
> > > > Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG / “Guth Usenet”
>
> > > course these are the very exact same folks that insisted Muslims had
> > > WMD coming out their ears, and that we did nothing the least bit wrong
> > > by hiring OBL and then by lying to him and his men that accomplished
> > > our cold-war dirty work.
>
> > > ~ BG
>
> > Interesting how officially taboo/nondisclosure as well as unusually
> > passive and otherwise inert our Apollo moon has become. Even its L1
> > is off-limits as to discussing any of many possibilities for future
> > usage, such as for my lunar space elevator (LSE-CM/ISS).
>
> You stole the idea from Kim Stanley Robinson, author of the Red Mars,
> Green Mars, Blue Mars trilogy.
The hell you always say. Good for you and those of your brown-nosed
kind. Too bad you're still dead wrong.
>
> > Why would our supposed "right stuff" of Apollo and most everything
> > since have to obfuscate/exclude anything?
>
> Because you don't understand it. Not a sending problem, more a
> receiving problem. ;)
Unlike yourself, I understand enough to realize when I'm being
systematically snookered.
>
> > Publicly funded = top secret and otherwise forever lost. How much
> > NASA and DARPA corruption is too much?
>
> Why don't you define that?
If it's public funded, then all 100% of that raw and processed data
needs to become public accessible (ASAP). Of course you still don't
see any problem with those bogus Muslim WMD (entirely GW Bush and Dick
Cheney contrived) or that of your kosher approved SEC withholding
their sworn responsibilities so that others of their faith-based kind
can take the rest of us to the cleaners.
>
> > Where's the other 99.9% of our LRO mission science data?
>
> Forthcoming. Didn't you like the idea of finding water near the south
> pole of the moon?
That wasn't actually 24 gallons of water (more like hydroxyl radicals
of h2o2), but then you don't bother reading their carefully worded
fine print of infomercial hype anyway, so what's the difference.
~ BG
BradGuth
had its seasonal tilt and we've always had our trusty moon that's
perfectly solid as any rock, and the human species evolved within a
few million years but only became relatively intelligent as of
thousands of years after the last ice age. Sure thing, why the hell
not go with the mainstream flow?
> http://s3tec.mit.edu/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=81&...
Eric Chomko
That's right. Kim Stanley Robinson wrote a story, sold it and made
money off the idea. You wrote a bunch a crap on the Internet which you
pay for and made nothing off it.
>
> > > Why would our supposed "right stuff" of Apollo and most everything
> > > since have to obfuscate/exclude anything?
>
> > Because you don't understand it. Not a sending problem, more a
> > receiving problem. ;)
>
> Unlike yourself, I understand enough to realize when I'm being
> systematically snookered.
>
Brown-nosing the Chinese as you do is being snookered.
>
> > > Publicly funded = top secret and otherwise forever lost. How much
> > > NASA and DARPA corruption is too much?
>
> > Why don't you define that?
>
> If it's public funded, then all 100% of that raw and processed data
> needs to become public accessible (ASAP). Of course you still don't
> see any problem with those bogus Muslim WMD (entirely GW Bush and Dick
> Cheney contrived) or that of your kosher approved SEC withholding
> their sworn responsibilities so that others of their faith-based kind
> can take the rest of us to the cleaners.
Bush and Cheney's WMD have nothing to do with LRO other than in the
twisted mind of Brad Guth.
>
>
>
> > > Where's the other 99.9% of our LRO mission science data?
>
> > Forthcoming. Didn't you like the idea of finding water near the south
> > pole of the moon?
>
> That wasn't actually 24 gallons of water (more like hydroxyl radicals
> of h2o2), but then you don't bother reading their carefully worded
> fine print of infomercial hype anyway, so what's the difference.
>
So says your .2485 cubic meters of empty space of which you call a
braincase.
BradGuth
> On Jan 4, 5:20 pm, BradGuth <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > The hell you always say. Good for you and those of your brown-nosed
> > kind. Too bad you're still dead wrong.
>
> That's right. Kim Stanley Robinson wrote a story, sold it and made
> money off the idea. You wrote a bunch a crap on the Internet which you
> pay for and made nothing off it.
legit as Kim Stanley Robinson.
>
> > > > Why would our supposed "right stuff" of Apollo and most everything
> > > > since have to obfuscate/exclude anything?
>
> > > Because you don't understand it. Not a sending problem, more a
> > > receiving problem. ;)
>
> > Unlike yourself, I understand enough to realize when I'm being
> > systematically snookered.
>
> Brown-nosing the Chinese as you do is being snookered.
Except my nose isn't the least bit Chinese brown, nor even nearly as
Jewish as yours.
>
> > > > Publicly funded = top secret and otherwise forever lost. How much
> > > > NASA and DARPA corruption is too much?
>
> > > Why don't you define that?
>
> > If it's public funded, then all 100% of that raw and processed data
> > needs to become public accessible (ASAP). Of course you still don't
> > see any problem with those bogus Muslim WMD (entirely GW Bush and Dick
> > Cheney contrived) or that of your kosher approved SEC withholding
> > their sworn responsibilities so that others of their faith-based kind
> > can take the rest of us to the cleaners.
>
> Bush and Cheney's WMD have nothing to do with LRO other than in the
> twisted mind of Brad Guth.
If you say so.
>
> > > > Where's the other 99.9% of our LRO mission science data?
>
> > > Forthcoming. Didn't you like the idea of finding water near the south
> > > pole of the moon?
>
> > That wasn't actually 24 gallons of water (more like hydroxyl radicals
> > of h2o2), but then you don't bother reading their carefully worded
> > fine print of infomercial hype anyway, so what's the difference.
>
> So says your .2485 cubic meters of empty space of which you call a
> braincase.
Not really. More like your NASA and their vast army of brown-nosed
minions says so about those "hydroxyl radicals".
Perhaps that LCROSS impactor plunged into various liquid/cryogenic
gasses before entering that otherwise crystal dry, extremely
electrostatic charged dust and loosely compacted soil that's in places
tens of meters thick. No wonder there wasn't much of any visible
flash.
~ BG
Eric Chomko
> On Jan 5, 10:22 am, Eric Chomko <pne.cho...@comcast.net> wrote:> On Jan 4, 5:20 pm, BradGuth <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > The hell you always say. Good for you and those of your brown-nosed
> > > kind. Too bad you're still dead wrong.
>
> > That's right. Kim Stanley Robinson wrote a story, sold it and made
> > money off the idea. You wrote a bunch a crap on the Internet which you
> > pay for and made nothing off it.
>
> You could always send me a pile of loot, and then I'd become just as
> legit as Kim Stanley Robinson.
>
A pile of poop, maybe...
>
> > > > > Why would our supposed "right stuff" of Apollo and most everything
> > > > > since have to obfuscate/exclude anything?
>
> > > > Because you don't understand it. Not a sending problem, more a
> > > > receiving problem. ;)
>
> > > Unlike yourself, I understand enough to realize when I'm being
> > > systematically snookered.
>
> > Brown-nosing the Chinese as you do is being snookered.
>
> Except my nose isn't the least bit Chinese brown, nor even nearly as
> Jewish as yours.
>
Your persecution complex of Jews is worse than their's pertaining to
the rest of the world.
>
> > > > > Publicly funded = top secret and otherwise forever lost. How much
> > > > > NASA and DARPA corruption is too much?
>
> > > > Why don't you define that?
>
> > > If it's public funded, then all 100% of that raw and processed data
> > > needs to become public accessible (ASAP). Of course you still don't
> > > see any problem with those bogus Muslim WMD (entirely GW Bush and Dick
> > > Cheney contrived) or that of your kosher approved SEC withholding
> > > their sworn responsibilities so that others of their faith-based kind
> > > can take the rest of us to the cleaners.
>
> > Bush and Cheney's WMD have nothing to do with LRO other than in the
> > twisted mind of Brad Guth.
>
> If you say so.
>
Legions of others agree.
>
> > > > > Where's the other 99.9% of our LRO mission science data?
>
> > > > Forthcoming. Didn't you like the idea of finding water near the south
> > > > pole of the moon?
>
> > > That wasn't actually 24 gallons of water (more like hydroxyl radicals
> > > of h2o2), but then you don't bother reading their carefully worded
> > > fine print of infomercial hype anyway, so what's the difference.
>
> > So says your .2485 cubic meters of empty space of which you call a
> > braincase.
>
> Not really. More like your NASA and their vast army of brown-nosed
> minions says so about those "hydroxyl radicals".
>
> Perhaps that LCROSS impactor plunged into various liquid/cryogenic
> gasses before entering that otherwise crystal dry, extremely
> electrostatic charged dust and loosely compacted soil that's in places
> tens of meters thick. No wonder there wasn't much of any visible
> flash.
>
But there was H2O and one day someone will be the first to drink Lunar
water!
BradGuth
I have no problems with honest Jews. Too bad so few if any honest
Jews bother to contribute to these Usenet/newsgroups.
NASA's version of such hard-rock lunar water at perhaps as little as
$1M/kg(1e-3 m3) should taste real good. However, it'll probably end
up costing us at least $10M/kg, but what the hell, it's only our hard
earned public loot that would only get otherwise wasted by some other
Republican or faith-based screw-up.
~ BG
Robert Collins
> Where�s the objective evidence that our Selene/moon is not the least
> radioactive elements that coexist and thereby unavoidably produce
>
> within its >25 K cold traps, in that its decomposition release (such
> as triggered by way of the LCROSS surface impactor) provided those
> �The ultraviolet visible spectrometer detected hydroxyl signatures
> just after impact that are consistent with a water vapor cloud in
> sunlight.�
>
> But where's our public funded science pertaining to the Earth-moon L1
> (Selene L1)? In other words, how extra hot or ultra cold and what's
> all that ultra-extreme vacuum like?
>
> If those polar cold traps are suggesting an environment near 25 K (as
> reported by our LRO team of NASA approved wizards), then perhaps <3%
> of the time the Selene L1 environment might become considerably
> colder, as well as offering a vacuum of at least 3e-21 bar (a million
> fold less pressure than the lunar surface), which should only pull
> more heat out of that tidal enhanced near absolute vacuum environment,
> as well as otherwise allowing more heat in whenever exposed to direct
> plus indirect sunlight (including moon IR and earthshine) that�s
> available 97+% of the time.
>
> Since most everything original about our Apollo mission R&D and their
> obtained science along with their half century advanced technology is
> either missing, remains as need-to-know or public nondisclosure/
> inaccessible, where's the other 99.9% of our public funded LRO
> science?
>
> Most of our Apollo missions were those surrounded by a physically dark
> as coal lunar terrain, as having converted the bulk of solar energy
> disregard all those mission images as having that surface albedo of 65+
> % and offering nothing UV reactive). Otherwise such heat is heat
> moonlight), and otherwise it�s exactly the same as being here on Earth
> except as if you were surrounded on all sides (including top to bottom
> by an array of 1218 watt/m2 radiant heat within each and every visible
> square meter for as far as the eye can see, as well as supposedly
> having essentially no significant atmospheric attenuation, as so much
> so toasty that even in the shade it would have remained extremely hot
> from all of that unavoidable surrounding secondary IR radiation.
>
> �LRO takes measurements from an altitude of about 31 miles, so
> researchers are not sure what dosages astronauts will see at the
>
> Actually the direct solar energy of 1367 w/m2 (as raw/naked average
> .
> http://spaceflightnow.com/news/n0912/20lroresults/
> "The moon has one of the most extreme thermal environments of any
> body in the solar system," said David Paige, principal investigator
> for the Diviner payload at the University of California, Los Angeles.
>
> In October, Diviner detected a cold trap in Hermite crater with
> temperatures of nearly -415 degrees Fahrenheit.
>
> "To put that kind of temperature into perspective, nothing like this
> has ever yet been measured in the solar system," Paige said. "One
> would have to maybe travel far beyond the Kuiper Belt to find an
> object with a temperature this low."
>
> -
>
> I�m finding it most interesting that so many of our best scientists
> extreme hot and cold and radiation risk our moon has to offer anyone
> unusually dense assortment of raw elements that�ll unavoidably turn
> cosmic energy into everything from soft X-rays to gamma., plus
> from the secondary/recoil IR average of 1217+ w/m2 (maximum 1452 w/m2)
> to that of hard X-rays that can rather easily become lethal saturation
> exposure. Oddly, not one frame of any X-ray sensitive Kodak film from
> our Apollo era showed us any hint of such radiation dosage or even
> thermal trauma, as though it wasn�t even measurable or otherwise worth
>
> In the polar crater shade, the most flexible of moonsuit synthetic
> materials would become so cryogenic at 25 K they (whereas most gasses
> become liquids or solids) could crack or even cause artificial
> nitrogen of 63 K), and a meter above that rather poorly warmed surface
> of such 3e-15 bar vacuum should be an even colder.
>
> thermal stability and a few meters worth of basalt between your frail
> DNA and all of that surrounding surface radiation exposure was just
> foolishness on my part. However, in many places that unusual crust/
> bedrock or composite soil of our physically dark moon is likely
> several times more background radioactive than Earth (exactly as
> exactly inert or failsafe to human DNA even if you�re entirely
> situated deep underground. Essentially, it�s as though that moon is
> locations as offering thorium, uranium and radium deposits upon or
> dug in.
>
> So, just because the moon is potentially 0.1% hollow doesn�t insure
> that your frail DNA is going to be entirely safe within all such
> naturally or artificially made hollow locations. Potentially harmful
> mineral ores and deposits of whatever�s radioactive should have been
> easily mapped as of 4+ decades ago, because the sufficient technology
> having existed, at least to within a km2 resolution, and as of most
> recently a surface resolution of 10 x 10 or 100 m2 should have this
> surface background dosage nailed as to what sorts of heavy minerals
> and radioactive substances exist, and even to what likely depths. The
> UV fluorescence imaging and subsequent mapping of surface minerals
> should have been well established by now, by LRO in far greater detail
> than ever before.
>
> liquid nitrogen environment. At the cryogenic 25 K environment should
> accommodate loads of dry ice (solid CO2) plus solids of pure oxygen
> that moon does have its own radium plus numerous surface deposits).
>
> landed onto our physically dark moon(Selene) that offers direct
> than liquid nitrogen), suggesting the moon itself is giving off
> something much less than 22 mw/m2.
>
> keeping such deep crater shadowed �cold traps� warmer than otherwise
> possible. (at 25 K even liquid nitrogen is going to be insulative)
>
> Too bad we don�t have any surface probe(s) reporting continuous
> though we actually do not have the necessary expertise and required
> technology of deploying such robotic probe landers. Also, we should
> those unlimited cold energy sinks of something near 25 K is going to
> easily generate 821 kw of nearly continuous clean energy to do
> whatever with).
>
> The S3TEC Center of ongoing research offers <85.4% conversion, whereas
> it seems likely 1.2 MW per thousand m2 is technically obtainable,
> still saturated with UV that PVs love to convert into electrons.
>
> Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG / �Guth Usenet�
I can remain silent no longer. Here with the above quoted evidence I
would like to register a formal complaint with Usenet Control about
the entity that calles itself 'Brad Guth'. The complaint is as
follows: Brad Guth, or whatever it is, is a poor example of space
activism and degrades the greater enterprise with its format. It
should therefore be held to shut up until it can present its
propaganda in a civilized and reasonable way.
Robert Collins
BradGuth
>
> I can remain silent no longer. Here with the above quoted evidence I
> would like to register a formal complaint with Usenet Control about
> the entity that calles itself 'Brad Guth'. The complaint is as
> follows: Brad Guth, or whatever it is, is a poor example of space
> activism and degrades the greater enterprise with its format. It
> should therefore be held to shut up until it can present its
> propaganda in a civilized and reasonable way.
>
> Robert Collins
Gee whiz, you don't seem to have any support for your mainstream
interpretation of my research, that by the way uses as much of your
NASA and other public funded data that fits into my ongoing and
continuously emerging interpretations.
Why don't you instead provide us with your independent interpretations
as to how hollow and otherwise valuable that moon of ours is?
~ BG
BradGuth
On Jan 2, 3:18 pm, Robert Collins <s...@dcdaea.coms> wrote:
> > I can remain silent no longer. Here with the above quoted evidence
> > I would like to register a formal complaint with Usenet Control about
> > the entity that calles itself 'Brad Guth'. The complaint is as follows:
> > Brad Guth, or whatever it is, is a poor example of space
> > activism and degrades the greater enterprise with its format. It
> > should therefore be held to shut up until it can present its
> > propaganda in a civilized and reasonable way.
Gee whiz, outside of the usual gauntlet of mainstream bullies and
rusemasters that I have to contend with, you don't seem to have any
support for your dysfunctional interpretation of my research, that by
the way often uses as much of your NASA and other public funded data
that fits into my ongoing and continuously emerging interpretations.
All that I’m suggesting is that our extremely unusual moon is not as
solid nor as inert as many here would like the rest of us to believe.
Why don't you instead provide us with your independent interpretations
as to how hollow and otherwise valuable that moon of ours is?
Some of Robert Collins wisdom isn’t without merit, such as the
following context as taken out of context from “Shuttle/ISS extended?”
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.space.policy/browse_frm/thread/6dfb773b56a8f06e?hl=en&scoring=d&
On Jul 31 2009, 4:41 pm, Robert Collins <s...@dcdaea.coms> wrote:
But we already _have_ that. Google "People's Republic of Upper U-
topi-a". If more countries had their socio-economic affairs
controlled
as well as Upper U-topi-a, the world would be a much better place.
Sometimes the necessity in a political strategy is deeply hidden in a
complex analysis relying on information many of us cannot ever know.
Who are you to say that a cold war of the West against the Chinese is
not wise given the threat they pose? Do you have magic information
that somehow makes moot the threat posed by a population of a billion
+
Communists? Big space operations would be nice today, but what good
is it if the geopoloitical economy is crippled or too unstable to
support the growth of nascent NEO facilities. Would it not be better
to order our affairs on Earth as well as possible before we set out
to
expand into space for good?
The difficulty of man's undertakings often arise because operations
are often undercapitalized or managed poorly. When we have a better
handle on how to run a world, decent-sized space settlements and
commercial undertakings will be much more likely to succeed.
Robert Collins
-
At least within this portion of his mindset, I’m on the exact same set
of tracks, and even close enough for accepting a few other notions
that Robert Collins sees fit to publish and defend. I only wish I was
half as good at words and subsequent story telling.
~ BG
BradGuth
Why is it always so hard for so many to deal with the best available
truths?
~ BG
BradGuth
Why is it always so hard for so many to deal with the best available
truths?
Where's our 5th grade and older spunk?
So what if our NASA/Apollo wizards didn't accomplish all that much
with their "right stuff", and then lost track of most everything
important as though it was of no significant value.
~ BG
BradGuth
Perhaps this topic should have been named "The 100% solid moon that's
passive and inert"
Adding that we've simply chosen to never set foot on that sucker
again, because it's so boring and monochrome light gray (in most
places near off-white, or lets call it antique-white). At least that
way I wouldn't have upset our NASA/Apollo good ship LOLLIPOP so much.
Odd that something that supposedly cooled off and thus having
solidified in orbit (within such a terrific vacuum), by rights it
should have become uniformly rather dense, all the way through.
~ BG
BradGuth
Meaning that it's supposedly not porous, as in airless or without
gaseous formed pockets or that of hosting any residual fluids that
could easily be extracted and unavoidably vaporize at such extreme
vacuum. Problem is, seems our extremely unusual moon is not
sufficiently dense under that robust basalt crust, and it has only a
relatively minimal iron core that could actually be of something other
because, there's simply not a sufficient magnetic or paramagnetic
marker other than what the mineral saturated basalt crust has to
offer.
~ BG
Robert Collins
> On Jan 2, 3:18�pm, Robert Collins <s...@dcdaea.coms> wrote:
> >
> > I can remain silent no longer. �Here with the above quoted evidence I
> > would like to register a formal complaint with Usenet Control about
> > the entity that calles itself 'Brad Guth'. �The complaint is as
> > follows: �Brad Guth, or whatever it is, is a poor example of space
> > activism and degrades the greater enterprise with its format. �It
> > should therefore be held to shut up until it can present its
> > propaganda in a civilized and reasonable way.
> >
> > Robert Collins
>
> Gee whiz, you don't seem to have any support for your mainstream
> interpretation of my research, that by the way uses as much of your
> NASA and other public funded data that fits into my ongoing and
> continuously emerging interpretations.
Your fits are more 'abram' than anything, and hence I don't really see
why you think anyone should respect the content of your posts, other
than as some sort of bizarre ego-gratification at your ability to
froth at the keyboard. You obviously type far too quickly for your
own good, or anyone else's. If you look closely at what I wrote there
It might be implied that "continuously emerging interpretations"
doesn't do much for space exploration, which would be fantastic if you
were being funded by the NSF and needed a good reason to continue your
'research'.
> Why don't you instead provide us with your independent interpretations
> as to how hollow and otherwise valuable that moon of ours is?
I'd probably prefer to look at a jovian moon or perhaps something in
the asteroid belt, but there are lots of good things about the moon.
For one thing, an authoritarian government such as the Chinese
Communist Party wouldn't have far to send a large military force if
there was ever a rebellion uprising on some moon colony. Never mind
that large state and non-state corporations would be there with an eye
to assuring an environment condusive to profitable buisness
undertakings, at least in theory.
The moon is in extremely close proximity to a large market hugry for
products and services as well as raw materials, in relation to
astronomical scales. The sale of those products and services can
drive development in the first part of any expansionist phase; after
that it is difficult to say where the money is. But, we don't really
have to worry about that now since there isn't _anything_ going on any
further out than L5 as far as human activity is concerned. Voyager (or
whatever it's called these days) notwithstanding.
None of this, of course, should be news to anyone here. Personally, I
like some of the moons on other planets just because its further away
from the Earth and all of its crazies. Tin-pot dictators of
yesteryear, who influence contemporary affairs to an intolerable
degree now, are the last people you want near, say, the delicate
machinery of an airlock. The "stuttering" method of your writing
probably tells us your also a physical spastic, perhaps with a special
helmet and a name-plate riveted to a spot in some quasi-rural, little
yellow schoolbus. Hell, *you'd* probably drool on the controls one day
and space everyone in your compartment by accident -- that is, if we
are somehow unable to reliably build drool-proof airlocks, on account
of the fact that Dancing With The Stars is on TV right now and I'll be
right back with the rest of this article.
(If you want, you can take a break from reading this post for about
twenty-two minutes, thirty if you don't skip the commercials.)
So, like I was saying, I'd prefer to skip the Moon and get a little
further away. That makes it harder since the start-up costs go way,
way up but I figure that should be all that much of a problem since
one the the things that H. Sap. is really, really good at is spending
money buying stuff. Engineering and Science, not so much, but that
can be fixed with education, at least in theory. (Hold on, I've got a
caller... "No, I don't need any your goddamned life insurance!" *slam*)
Uh, where was I. Oh yeah, moons. And asteroids. Asteroids are
probably a good choice, but only if we can get robots to push them out
of the belt and somewhere where it's easier to work on them. Again,
expensive, but not as expensive as trying to work *in* the asteroid
belt.
It's just as cold or colder than the Moon in the further reaches of
the Solar System, and the vaccum is just as hard so it insulates well
no matter where you are. In neither place will there be trouble with
cooling your computers and machinery unless you choose Venus or
Mercury in a fit of insanity. I couldn't personally imagine a
scenario where anyone would want to colonize Venus, but it's a good
thing to consider and reject just in case we need to be prepared to
put Venus advocates in straightjackets the moment they start
campaigning for Venusian operations. But otherwise I wouldn't dream
of it even if I had a nuclear robot body, which I note would probably
require a smog test in California and annoying paperwork anywhere it
went. Don't get me started on software updates and preventative
maintenance, either. Let's just stick with tele- operated robotics,
CNC, or semi-autonomous robot agents with specialized field-level AI
and leave it at that. It's so much simpler.
Other destinations in the solar system are good from the standpoint of
epidemiology: any disease will have further to travel in the isolating
conditions of extra-planetary commerce. A pandemic on Earth would be
much less likely to infect the personnel of a space-station on Titan
or Io, whereas the Moon is close enough that frequent travel would
make the two atmospheres effectively linked from the standpoint of
microbiology. Nanotechnology presents similar challenges, but we
don't know exactly what they are yet so it is difficult to form a
perspective without more hard data.
Speculation is fun, though, and there's a bunch of good fiction out
there with entertaining scenarios on the future of people and cities
in space. Not much committment from the public on getting there, but
hey it's only the twenty-first century. There's a long, long way to
go before it will be commonplace to live in off-planet settlements
with advanced technological comforts and labour-saving devices. Maybe
someone can convince Microsoft to name one of its releases "Windows
Jupiter", "Titan 9.0" or something to raise awareness and nudge things
along a bit faster. And we probably need something better than the
AT&T Death-Star logo. Symbolic associations with cute puppies and
kittens wouldn't hurt either, perhaps a Hello-Kitty mascot to narrate
infomercials on YouTube wouldn't be out of order.
See, Brad? There's lots of things you can do with coherent English
that just aren't possible with word salad.
As promised, I have informed Usenet Control of your transgression and
expect their response at any moment.
Robert Collins
BradGuth
Wow! nice blocks of well crafted word salad, that unfortunately has
nothing whatsoever to do with our semi-hollow or porous moon(Selene).
However, for fun I'll eventually read through parts of it so as to
insure that you get full credit.
At least my honest speculations are those based upon interpreting the
best available science, plus as always sticking within those pesky
regular laws of physics.
I sure hope that "Usenet Control" has nothing better to do, than to
follow up your request to terminate anyone having any deductive
formulated mindset, such as mine.
In the mean time, perhaps you can tell us why that unusual moon isn't
the least bit hollow or otherwise sufficiently porous within or under
that thick crust.
Otherwise, I'd like us to collaborate as to exactly what that 7.35e22
kg captured asteroid/moon(Selene) has to offer, including it's L1
usage that Clarke, Boeing and a few others thought was extremely
nifty, as did I for accommodating my LSE-CM/ISS.
Venus is another issue that's hardly insurmountable, at least by most
any 5th grader or older person that isn't brainwashed to whatever
status quo standards that you seem to approve of.
Do you have a better plan of action (besides extensive use of blinders
and ear plugs) that we should follow?
~ BG